So, let's bring this to order. This meeting was called to order in accordance with the Open Public Meetings Act. Notice of this meeting was provided to the Home News Tribune, Star Ledger, and the Highland Park Planet on February 3rd, 2025, and was posted on the Burough
website at www.hpur.com and on the bulletin board at Burrow Hall, 221 South Fifth Avenue, Pilot Park, New Jersey, and remain continuously posted as required by law. Fire exits are to the left, to the right
of the chambers. Please speak into the microphones. And now do the pledge of allegiance. To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation
indivisible with liberty and justice for all. roll. Miss Ham, Mr. Brusher, Mr. Chen here, Missazy here, Mr. Hail here, Mr. Ho present, Mr. Lenerys,
Mr. Malay here, Mr. Pearlman, Mr. Stern Cardinell here, Mr. Williams here, Mr. Lynch here, Mr. Crosenza here, Mr. Cotch here. Okay. Um, next on the agenda is the
approval of the June 12th, 2025 uh regular meeting. Uh, do I have any uh questions or comments? Yes. Um, I noticed that uh the minutes say that uh we provide notice to the
Highland Private Planet on these minutes. Is that still? I do not know. Um, on page to uh the uh advocacy
organization about I'm sorry there's um 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 lines down uh should be the fair share housing center not fair housing center those in the middle of the sentence. Yes. And what was your correction?
Uh fair share housing center share. Okay. I have um a number of suggested paragraph breaks on this page and the next page for the many people who will read this in the future so you can have a bit of easier time reading. And uh near the bottom of
the page on the left side uh it says 25,000 people commuting into town. I think there's an extra zero there. uh if especially if you reference the actual uh housing plan gauge 27.
No, I I would agree. Would you like to just probably be easier to to email your paragraph suggestions? I've got them marked. I can provide them to you after that. Be great. Does that work for you? Any other questions or comments or
minutes a motion to adopt? Second. All those in favor? Uh, yes. All right. Mr. Chen, I miss it.
Mr. H. Yes. Mr. H. Yes. Mr. Lys. Mr. Malay. Yes. Mr. Stone Cardell. Yes. Mr. Williams. Yes. I'm sorry. Who's second that? Thank you.
Okay. Um, we're going to uh switch the order here. We're going to begin with the hearing on new matters. The YFM LNN 810 North Second Avenue LLC. I think it's a a division and um since I think you all
are here and people from the public are here so I think that would be the best use of our time and um how so we have somebody making a proposing [Music]
so we're going to take up the the matter whoever making the application. [Music] You Mr. Chairman, my name is Warren F. I'm the attorney for the applicant of this matter.
And um Mr. chairman and board members. Um my client's very proud to make this uh application before the board today and it's also u it's a culmination. Could you just make use of the mic?
Oh, I'm sorry. That good. Is that recording? The green lights on. Okay. Okay. So, uh, start again for the record. So, Mr. Chairman and board members, uh, my name is Warren Fank. I'm
the attorney for the applicant of this matter. Uh, my client is very proud to bring this application before the board since it's the culmination of a cooperative uh, effort with the burrow. Uh over the course of many months, my
client purchased this building at 810 North Second Avenue that was formerly used as a laboratory and is now seeking minor site plan approval to convert the uh building to a multifamily apartment
building consisting of four units along with various improvements to the exterior area of the building. No variances are required or sought and the application thanks to the burrow for having uh worked out a redevelopment
plan for this property that was uh adopted by the burrow and makes this application possible. Now that the basics are out of the way, I propose to call Brian Murphy uh an engineer from FWB Associates to provide
more details, respond to comments by the pro professionals and answer any questions. Uh my client's architect uh is also here uh Mr. uh Mafali Gut of Gut Van Associates and Consultants and he will also be available for any
questions. Thank you. Murphy, raise your right hand. Please do testimony. You're about to give this word the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I do. Can you briefly provide your credentials? Sure. Uh Brian Murphy, Murphy, 1856 Route 9 Tom. I'm a principal at FW
Associates. I've been practicing engineering for uh 30 some odd years now. Um I have not had the pleasure of being before your board, but I've been before roughly hundred other boards throughout the state as well as accepted as professional uh by the superior board as
well. Um I'm a graduate of NGIT. Uh I have a bachelor's in science and civil engineering. All your licenses are current and up to date. They are. Thank you. accepting those. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, as indicated, the the application
tonight is 810 North North Second Avenue. It's block 503, block 24. Why don't you turn that so we could see it? Maybe put it closer on an angle to the door. Yeah, something like that.
Try to stand up and block it. Um, so I'm indicating uh exhibit A1 or exhibit one. I guess there will be Google Earth aerial shot of the property. Property is indicated in red roughly in the center of the plan. Uh to the north is kind of up. Um so to the
north is Second Avenue, there's single family houses beyond. To the east there's single family homes as well. The south there's single family homes. And to the west there's a vacant lot uh which then goes down to uh the street. And then as as you can see, there's
apartments beyond. Um, basically it's a commercial use in the middle of a residential neighborhood. Uh, what's going on here? So, it's a it's a current laboratory. Uh, so we're looking to convert this into four two-bedroom apartments. Uh, basically
rehab the existing building. Uh, I'll go to briefly to I'll call this exhibit three. Uh it's a color rendering of the uh front of the building. It's just in a faximile of what we're looking to do. Basically substantial improvements to the exterior
and and interior of the building. Try to have an upto-date look compared to especially compared to what's there now. Um new lighting, windows, uh obviously the the exterior would be completely redone with stuck up. Um, and a new landscape package as well to kind of
dress up the uh the building and um make it more presentable, especially compared to what's going on now. The bike rack in the back, the trash area will be in the rear of the building as well. Um, going to the site plan.
[Music] Chairman, excuse me. Would you like the exhibits to be marked to be are these were were the site plan submitted with the application? It was okay. We don't have to mark that. Okay. Thank you. Um so this is just color rendering of
101. Uh it's the exact same plan that was submitted to the board. It's just uh in color. Uh as you can see the the building is existing. We're not proposing to uh demolish the building or or change it in that way. Basically we're going to redo the inside and the exterior of the building. There's an
existing driveway off of North Second Avenue that comes around the back. We'll have four parking stalls proposed along the rear and on the far rear there's going to be a canopy. There's a uh steps that go down to a basement level. Um and
the trash is going to be basically stacked along that back area as well as a bike rack also. Um so we'll have some improvements obviously to the exterior. We're actually reducing the impervious slightly compared to what's out there.
You can see there's not a whole lot we're changing with the site or we can really do sitewise because it's it's almost entirely composed by uh the driveway and the building itself. Um storm water, we're we we're not
providing any storm water. Again, we're not impacting or changing or or increasing any drainage uh compared to what's out there today. uh parking and there's four uh stalls provided and that is what is required. Uh there are a couple of waiverss that we'll be
requesting uh walkways between entrances of the building and the parking areas. Uh we are providing a walkway off the main walkway off the second avenue to a door that that'll be on on the uh north side of the building. U and there's a walkway in the rear, but there's
basically a door on the on the side right against the parking lot. So, we're going to line that up with the striped area of the handicap uh parking. So, there won't be a walkth per se. So, technically, it's a waiver. Uh shade trees along the perimeter of the parking
lot. Uh there's no room basically to safely provide shade trees in that area without uh basically picking up the the pavement and disturbing the pavement and there's not enough room for them to grow in that area. Uh we can provide two street trees along the front.
I wouldn't recommend it only because the power lines run overhead right in that location. Uh so if we do something it's going to be have to be something that doesn't grow very high. Uh we can provide it but I'll leave that to the board on on what you would rather and right now I think there's just uh
small shrubs in front. It's actually grass right along right along that front area between the sidewalk and the curb. Uh it's it's grass but against the building. Up against the building we have Yeah. We There's some shrubs there now. They're they're not great. So, we're going to be redoing all that and dressing that up
substantially. Um, but between the sidewalk and the curb, that's really what I'm talking about. Whether we we provide street trees there or not, I don't think it's a great location only because of the the power lines. If they weren't there, I'd say absolutely. But
how wide is that? It's about it's about five feet. Okay. Yeah, it's wide enough to put a tree in. You know, that that that's not really the issue. It's more having the power lines literally directly overhead. But I I'll leave that to the perview of the
board. Um whether you want those or not. Um and the last waiver is for green infrastructure strat strategies. Uh again, there's there's not a lot we can provide on the site. If we're coming in new and and this was a blank site, that'd be something else, but we're
really kind of limited on on what we can actually physically do. uh the the sidewalk does go into the the planting beds um that we have. So that would be one, but we have to have two and I just can't meet the second one. Um so that would be the uh third waiver. Uh the
other waiverss that are indicated in the uh professionals review letters will uh will be eliminated. So it's only those three. Um, with regard to review letters, CME's letter dated 8725, uh, agree with all the all the comments
in that letter, uh, only item five would be the only one that I have any kind of issue with, if you want to call it that. Uh, it's asking us to get waiverss from, uh, the soils conservation district in the county. Uh, so conser conservation district
threshold is 5,000 feet of disturbance. We have nowhere near that. So rather than going through the exercise of getting a waiver, I'd ask that we just kind of have to do that because the the site's barely over 5,000 square feet. So it's it's really not necessary,
but but you will get the letter of exemption from the mil county. Yeah, the county has actually electronically it's it's kind of a a much faster process where it may take five to six weeks to get a response from soils on something like this. Um, and
this is really just an exercise of futility. Um, in uh the environmental commission letter, uh, they recommend forest pavement for the driveway. Uh, we're the the driveway exists. We're proposing to leave it as is. Uh, so to
keep that. Um, the walkways though, we we do have some proposed walkways as I indicated in the front and in the rear that we can make pa rather than the concrete that's proposed now. So we can get some some forest pavers there and uh
kind of at least help mitigate a little bit on on the things that were proposing on the site as opposed to what's existing. Uh the rain barrels, we just don't have room for rain barrels in a safe location. Um the building uh they request that it be cleaned. Uh it's
going to be completely gutted, so it's it'll be clean. Um so it'll it'll be fine on that end. uh commission on universal access uh they asked for the ramp. There's a door in the rear. So if they see it's just the ramp ramp down to to the stairs that go to the basement
and up to the door that's proposed in the rear of the that's um and have no issues with the rest of the letter. uh LRK letter of 8725. We agree to address all the items in a letter with the exception of the
waiverss that I indicated and the following items. Uh item 8.2 um you know some of these are really just discussion points. Uh they asked that we make this a van accessible handicap stall which means basically the striping area has to be wider. So we
will provide that. Um 8.4 before uh they were asking that we uh push the wheel stops out from from the building further which I I understand the thought process behind that but my fear is that we we we it's a tight turnaround as it is. I don't want
to push the cars further back into that area. So rather I'd rather put ballards up in front of the the stalls that will keep them from hitting the building because I think that's obviously the concern is that those blocks sometimes move and you can wind up hitting the building. So puts in front of each one
of those stalls so it can't hit. Um the driveway apron uh they requested that we drop the slope of that driveway apron. Can't really do that because the driveway to the uh unit to to our east.
Um the house to our east is actually a foot and a half maybe off of our driveway and they're connected. And obviously if we drop that, we're now regrading and and redoing the the driveway and we're redoing the sidewalk along the front because all that would
have to drop as well. And I would point out that there is sidewalk along wayside along our frontage. That's where the sidewalk stops. There's no more sidewalk down this area a second. There it is. Yeah,
sorry. We'll get to public comment later. You have a question? No. Yeah. Uh, just I'm sorry. I got So, on I was on the site the other day. So, you're saying that the there's a block
retaining wall. That is the property owners on the the left. I believe that's the property owners on the left. Yeah. So, in other words, it looks like that's on its last legs as well. So if you were to line it, it would Yeah. So um and there's there's there's a
slatted vertical wooden fence that goes around the property. Is that technically this applicants or I don't believe so that the fence is is off the property. Okay. So I don't believe it's theirs. All
right. It's it's falling down as well. Yeah. It's not in great shape. I agree. Okay. Yeah, that that's not physically on the top. Um, and 8.8 that just goes back to the
street trees again that we already discussed. So I'll leave that to the perview of Ford and 812 is really regarding floor plans which I'll uh questions from the professionals or any comments you know because he did answer you know some of what you were
discussing. I agree that the fence appears to be off the property and that dry stack block wall concerns me, but it's not on the property. There's an extension to it. The lower ones you set in mortar and the
upper ones are wobbly, but I I walked it. I looked at it. I looked at the plan and they can work with the neighbor, but seems like a hazard to me, but not much we can do. No, I just, you know, again, anything
any comments? I guess a couple comments from the memo 8.2 I guess for the benefit of the board. Can you walk us through how life ra Sure. So we we have about four feet on that north side of the parking lot.
They're basically we we're showing a pad out there now. That door is going away. So I'll actually be able to shift those stalls up a little bit. So that last stall I'm I'm going to add that extra width to that last stall. Uh so so it'll
gain a little extra room. But you're also increasing the van accessible. Correct. Correct. I'm not sure you can do both at the same time. Well, I I'm I have to increase the the ADA. You know, there's there's no waiver to that. So it has to has to be widened. So I'll pick up the 3 ft on this. It's
roughly four feet. So I'll gain another foot on that on that far one. Um on to we address the accessible parking space parking uh bike pad rather just needs to be resized. So I think we'll
deal with that when it's constructed or figure out how the size is located uh before a co uh the street trees I agree with the street tree advisory committee there's opportunity to put street trees in was likely to a lower smaller street tree uh
if necessary because they recommended so I trust that they could find the right species. Yeah I I'll looked at the species that they recommended. I don't know if they were aware that the power lines were there so I'll have my landscape architect look at those trees and see if they're the appropriate ones or not. I I have high degree of confidence that the
shade tree advisor made uh made the right comment there. I'd like to see the two trees as well. Um regarding the lighting clarify that won't be greater than the 3300 Kelvin. Yeah, we we'll bring the uh temperature down. Any signage?
Uh there will be a sign. Um we're thinking maybe up on the the the dark top of the building. Uh it'll be compliant. This is not going to be anything else in this is kind of like a maybe a name of the building or something along those lines. We'll revise the architecturals to
provide that to show that it's okay. So it'll be a sign for building 8 10 for fire department access. Yeah, it'll it'll it'll probably be a name of the building, you know, uh whatever picked and then obviously there'll be addresses above the doors. Okay.
I think we'll have to coordinate that with the uh redevelopment entity because the red plans more or less silent on signage. We're trying to be flexible, but it was intended to be addressed in the redevelopment agreement, which it wasn't. So, since this sign is new, we'll have to collaborate with the
redevelopment agreement. It's a minor thing, but it's a technical step we have to play. Uh yeah, the 810 will have to be on a building pursuant to the fire department's uh request. Uh and I have no issues with that. Obviously, everything else is related to the four
plants. Thank you. Thank any questions or comments from the board. Uh am I correct? There's only uh one door for any of these apartments. So, not two two entrances or two exits.
There's two doors. So, so the the front door feeds the front two units. Yeah. And then there'll be a side door and they that that'll feed the the other two units. Okay. But it's essentially it's it's one one door for
two one. Yeah. There's basically you come into a foyer and then there'll be a door for each part off the foyer. To be clear, each apartment has only one way in and out. Oh, I'm sorry. Wait. So, when you say uh
two doors, each apartment. Sorry. So, when you say two doors, you each unit still has only one way in and out. Yes. Thank you. Is that the answer?
I'll let the architect. Well, I was going to say I have a question too, but I think you know better. I'm not qualified to answer this question. Can we just wait to be called upon because we have, you know, people that are suggest everyone take a breath. So, Alan, you what was your follow-up
question? You had the answer. Okay. And you had a a question about what wait for the Okay. And you were next. Yes. Um, so you mentioned about brain infrastructure. Uh does that include
building materials? No. So there's uh the sustainability and then there's green infrastructure. The green infrastructure really more addresses the the exterior of the building and and storm water where the sustainability is more in you know your
your windows your your efficiency of your of your HVC and utilities that that'll still be complied with. Are there any extra measures taken in the sustainability arena with regard to
building? I appreciate that you guys are not knocking this building down and you're just refurbishing the existing building because that adds to the sustainability in this project. Sure. Um but are there any other sustainable initiatives being taken in the building of this building?
Yeah, the architect can answer as well, but so basically the window treatments are going to be energy efficient. All the appliances are going to be energy efficient energy efficient. Uh all the uh the toilets and sinks and everything else, the showers all be basic
consumption reduction. And I have one other question. Um so I know that this building was built in 1940 and it's an older building. I'm not aware of the building's history in terms of
renovating or if it's had anything done since it's been built. Um, is there a concern regarding air quality during the interior demo? I'd have to let the architect. Any other questions?
Yeah, I have a kind of a small question, but something I always like to ask about. Um, so we're talking about sustainability and green building practices, all that stuff. Uh, is this intended to be all electric or are there going to be gas lines and gas appliances? Uh, if you know the answer, I don't know the answer. I love the
answer. I say it should be all electric. Uh, because we're going to have to retrofit everything in 10-15 years anyway. So, like just, you know, to the extent possible, it should be all electric. I don't know what the existing situation is in terms of gas lines to the various parts of the building or anything, but um you know, it's obviously cheaper if
you're renovating and you don't have to build gas lines. It's cheaper to not do it uh and just have all electric where possible. So um that's not in any standards or anything. It's just we're going to have to deal with it anyway, so you might as well do on Friday. Um that that um exhibit is that a
rendering of the exterior the bottom one. Yeah. Yeah. It's an example of what of of the types of material. The windows may be different and that that kind of thing, but that's the general look of the building. It's going to be a stuck type. Okay. Is
is the um it's going to be taken into consideration in terms of like you know just looking like the surrounding buildings because I I understand that stuff was not exactly a material that's used in town.
Correct. Uh but again, compared to what's there now, it's a substantial upgrade to to what's there now. Uh it's it's it's it's unattractive, let's say, right now. Well, I mean, my understanding is that
um in terms of using STO as an exterior material, there's permeability issues. It's just my been my experience. So, I don't know. As long as it's constructed properly, it's not an issue. But there there were problems with with Ephus when you when
you had people that maybe not weren't weren't the most experienced doing it. There were major issues with mold and so forth. Go ahead. So the location of this building is on North Second Avenue, right? Like around.
Yeah. By um wayside. Oh, okay. Right by the uh Yeah, Wayside is over here. The apartments are over in this area, right? And then seconds here. Okay. Okay. And that area has um a pretty diverse style of housing.
Yeah. The along along Wayne side is definitely a lot new higher newer stock of of housing for sure. And obviously as you get further back in the neighborhood, you have and we have like a brand new school in that area and there are some commercial buildings in that area. So it wouldn't
look wholly out of place this building. I don't believe so. Again, we're not talking about something that's ultra modern and and and really doesn't fit. It's it's we're trying to rehab the existing building. We're kind of stuck with working with what we have. Um but I
I think the came up with a nice design. Will there be mixed materials on the exterior because in your rendering it kind of looks like um cement block and like siding, but you're saying the whole building's going to be stuck. It'll most likely be the entire thing most likely.
Okay. Okay. Any other at this time? U if anyone from the public has a question specific for the engineer and would like to you know have addressed that this would be the time if there's going to be let's you want to make comments at a
later time that doesn't preclude you but this is if you have a comment or a question at this point in time. Guess I should ease the mic. No there's mic. Well, sure. You're not mine. Hi, my name is Pitchson. I reside at 200
Jackson Avenue. Hi. Sorry. Can you I need to get your name and address. I know you just said it, but it's a little slower. I'm sorry. Luke Hitchensson reside at 200 Jackson Avenue. Luke, you said Louis Hendrickson L.
Pitchen. P I C H I N S O N. Okay. And your address? It's 200 Jackson Avenue. And are you within a 200 foot zone? I'm right across the street from So you got my questions were uh and Pat, I don't
know. It seems to me that I can ask questions about parking. Is this appropriate? I would assume so. Yes. Um I'm curious. There's four units. E yes. And uh what is the standard uh I don't know the jargon. What is the standard
factor for parking places per residential unit? The ordinance is one per two for each unit and that ordinance is has been amended by the that's the that's the redevelopment plan. That's the redevelopment plan not the
ordinance. Um, so we're going to have four units with four uh four parking spaces on site and um having lived there ever since the the uh the wayside development went in there with parking
is is really um a problem. Okay. And when the labs went under, it's sort of alleviated our problem. Um so what I'm saying is that there may have not been much do about parking recently. There
always has been and it's um one of the major problems is um overflow parking from the Mr. Pitchinson if right now I just want to see if you have questions for what Mr. Well, I want to establish the
context of the question and that is that I believe that there's a problem with parking as is and that this will exacerbate the the problem. Okay. Okay. Okay. Um my
my what my my comments are um evidenced by the cover of the redevelopment plan which shows a van parked in front of your um proposed development and that's overflow parking from the uh from the
other area. May I just show you that? So, all I'm trying to establish is that there's overflow parking already. Um, where are the other cars with just four four units? Are we suggesting that there's only going to be four cars in in four two-bedroom units? So, one
All I'm suggesting is we're meeting the requirement. Okay. Um well then my my conclusion is that there we're are going to have problems there and that the planning board should be taking that into account in some fashion
or another. How many uh spaces will be um how many spaces will be fit on the uh the street front of the property? Two. Two. So that's six. Okay. Uh again my suggestion is since a lot of
that space is frequently take taken up by uh overflow I I don't know what to say. I think it's you know it's a very difficult problem. You guys are obviously uh content with doing that but it's going to be a problem that's going to come back to the bur of Island Park.
Thank you to the sir. Thank you sir. Thanks man. Are there any uh questions from the online public? No. Okay. So, I guess seeing none, free to sit down
while your next witness. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Uh, next witness our architect. Good evening. This testimony about to give the sword is the truth, all the truth, and nothing but the truth. Yes, I do. Please state your name, please.
My name is Davi Guts. Can you spell it for me? N AF T O L I G U T. And can you briefly provide your credentials for the board? Yes, I'm a licensed architect in New Jersey and several other states. I'm the principal of Gutban LLC. It's a
Lakewoodbased architectural firm. I have testified in front of other boards. I've never testified here. Okay. And uh are your licenses current? Yes, they are. Where is expert? Yes. Thank you.
So um Mr. Cut, you heard the questions questions before that would have been presented. So perhaps you can uh enlighten the uh board and the public. I'll just give a a quick brief overview. Um again, first floor is 3,513
ft. Second floor is 1,410 ft and the basement is 983. The building is 19 ft 4 in. The building will be 5ear construction which is regular wood construction. It will be fully sprinkled and that goes back to the question about the two egresses,
right? It's a sprinkle building. So one, you know, we did a full code code review and u one one egress into each unit is adequate. Um, plus we have egress windows in the units. Okay, so the first floor has
three units on the first floor. Each one has two bedrooms, a kitchen, living area and home office and each one is equipped with two bathrooms. They are type A bathrooms as is required. The second floor is one unit
also two bedrooms, living space, kitchen, home area, office area, and laundry. Um, in the basement is just going to be storage. Mr. Gut, could you explain what a type A bathroom is? It's it's it's it's handicapped as much
as required by type A. It's a certain certain type of bathroom that's required for this type of unit. So meaning it will be equipped with a banking if if you ever someone needs to install grab bars. So it's space you know door has
enough clearance for for a turnaround and we equip with backing for grab bars. Thank you. Um I just want to address some of the comments from the letter. There was a comment about about the
stairs in the basement um that they go nowhere which is correct and they're going to be taken out. This stair goes up and it goes down. The down will be eliminated and you're going to access the basement from this ramp through the stairs over here.
There was a comment about um the comp the plan not compatible with the rendering which is true rendering more concept something else I was trying to show the material which is going to be
looking at SP looking at a new picture around the roof. Nice beautiful black windows. I don't think this photo is the light of this market. So, can we just mark Is this pre-marked as exhibit two? I think they were submitted.
Yeah, they were submitted. Yeah, they got the picture that were part of the set. another only other one also substit more contrast and we're going to have high efficiency we're going to have LED lights all the
all the new fixtures done to be high efficiency fixtures. All the window units on wood units will be coming out would be placed with Ptech units or many many splits on the every single unit have its own thermostat and its own
unit. question regarding the hot water and the utility room. So this room in the basement will be where all the hot water units will be again will be high efficiency. There was a comment about this unlabelled room. This room right now is
double elevator. It will get eliminated the floor part of the open space. There's a comment about space label. It's just a resto area. I think that's all.
Any questions from our professionals? Bruce or Chris? Uh just a couple the address most of the comments in my memo. Um can you just clarify regard whether it's
regarding the content or will there be any exterior units on the ground or be roofing out here? Yeah, we're still debating if units which won't need it or use that if that's the case condensers along the right side of the building out of
the walkway between the walkway and the building on the right side of the building. makes s if that's the case do you anticipate or what setback do you anticipate that there would be between the units and yes
they could be wall mounted uh it might be fairings but I I don't know since but given that the there's a large green space for townhouse development next to it. It
should have a impact on the surrounding here. There's approximately just from I was just there today. There's about three four feet between the wall and that vertical fence sink. Um
give or take. Um it would be difficult, you know, depending on how they're arranged. you know, you might have some difficulty getting around them to service different units, but other than that, you you you basically can't even see the building too well through the
it's a considerable number of trees that side. Yeah. So, according to the survey, the setback varies between 2.4 and 2.5 ft. And a guess basically a suitcase size, large
suitcase size. It would have a setback of about a foot. I would need to review the ordinance to see if required. But as I said and I agree with chairman, it would have minimal impact on the screen.
Uh one of the bedrooms in unit number two. Uh I could not tell because the drawings did not appear to be to scale and I understand you're coming new to the project. Um that will have to be resized via at least well one it was off by
Okay. So we were we will be receiving revised plans. Yeah. I believe it was discussed that it's a matter of several feet then we address it. Okay. And obviously I had a sketch plan
had a sketch plan offering suggestions to kind of clean up the construction which I think the contract would love since the walls being lined up. Um it's just offer for consideration. You don't have to compromise. You have a question asked the architect.
Mini splits can be the condenser unit can be mounted to the wall. Correct. and they only stick out about a foot 15 inch. I don't think they're going to be very large units for those. So, it might be the easy one to get to the service
and fly it and each individual will look nice. Any questions or comments from the board? I'm gonna speak up. My only concern given and it was brought up I think with the site engineer um in that if you are
living in the front part of the building and you park around the corner, you basically have to walk up the driveway to the entrance, right? There is no secondary entrance to the front apartments from the parking lot per se
other than walking up the driveway. That's great. Okay. I mean there is parking in front of of the building as well. And you know anyway I just there I just wanted to clarify there's no back way into the
front apartments. Well one of the units has has that extra door going. No admit the front's not okay. Uh I'm sorry questions. Alicia
uh I have a question regarding is there one mini split per room in the unit? Well usually the way it's done is is there is like you know one condenser and then there'll be few air handlers for each room for each room. That's the way we want to do it. And would they also be providing the
heat or is the heat of course? Okay. So there's no um there won't be any duct work running. So it's all this heat. Got it. Great controls for each room. Yeah. Any other questions from the board?
Yes. I have a question about the doors again. Just trying to uh reconcile the first floor plan with the rendering here. Don't bother. No, and I I there was back and forth. So, you're
wondering how this splits into two units, right? Exactly. Yeah. It's going to it's going to get real. Okay. This is the look. This is the look. Grand entrance. We'll break it up. We'll be over between. It's just kind of like, hey, this is what we're This is what we have here, but it
won't be plated. Any other questions? Joe Chris actually chairman to your comment about the rear access the sketch that I provide actually in a way tries to resolve that issue such that all the units have rear access. I'm sorry what is that?
Uh the sketch provided in my memo was a consideration that addresses your comment about providing rear access for all four units. Okay. But again that's for applicants consideration. I know when we were contemplating the concept plan while drafting the new government plan, I had offered some
ideas about having a common corridor from front of the building. That way guests could enter from the building instead of walking down the driveway to fair doors. But I would agree with the that there's extremely limited space. Putting a common hallway would chew up a lot of square footage.
Sure. Um and um actually there's a comment that Mali raised about the whether it be gasoline service to build um on the since you were talking about the dless unit
gas service I believe so question um questions regarding the sustainability and any sustainable materials that are being used to
again all the all the That's upgrade. And also the wall cavities now have insulation. We plan on keeping just over dryer.
is building constructed in a way that in the future could um convert to solar I would say so it essentially could just be put on the roof [Music]
and my Last question that I asked the gentleman that spoke before you was, is there a concern regarding air quality during the demo of the interior? But the interior is being gutted. Correct. Is um there a possibility that what is
being demoed inside has maybe paint or if there is they'll have and you just said it's going to be one more question, Chris. I guess not really a question, just comment. I think what board members alluding to is that the burrow is hyper sensitive to uh
demolition because we dealt with a large project on Cleveland Avenue and it was a nightmare. So, I just want to make sure the notice that they take all the concerns to me. Thank you. Any questions? Yes, I have a
question about windows now. Um, do you anticipate any access to the roof from the second floor unit, whether for maintenance or for emergency or for uh someone just wants to be on the roof? No,
again, the ladder is not high enough. It's not too high for a ladder. I have a question. Just to be clear on this stuckco, it is the the synthetic, right? Is the rendering with the synthetic application? This
looks like almost like a block. Right. Kind of like like they put score lines and stuff that kind of look but just but the synthetic stuckle can replicate that. Yeah. Just with with living space.
Uh is the roof sloped so that the water goes into the drains? on the side. It's flat roof with a slight pitch on the side of the building that let the water off. It's not sloped. It's a flat roof with
So it's sloped a little bit. So water will flow. Yeah. It's either slope to center draining sometimes or sometimes slope to the perimeter where it goes out of a small hole on the side of the building. Will your drain pipes be underground? I'm sorry. I think I missed it.
So there will be scuffers on the roof. I'm not sure if there there are gutters and leaders coming off the building off the far end going down way side, you
know. Yeah. Away from Northing. It looks like it's sloped much like the rest. You know, the property slopes considerably that way. Looks like if the roof is pitched, it goes that way. I I don't it can't tell because it's in disrepair if there's one or two leaders that drop from there. There is a gutter
at this time. Yeah. I think my comment was that if it's not on the sides of the building, meaning the right side now set back the left side where the driveway is, there seems to be opportunity to put a planter storm water planting box at least allow for slow. I'm a little
concerned about storm water runoff to the neighboring properties to the houses to be greater even as the exist. So in the front certainly anything we can get into the front planting beds is fine. Uh the rear though problem with
the rear is we have bike racks and basically where the trash cans are going to go as well. So it's getting tight back there. Uh we could direct the roof gutter towards the open space that's next to us rather than
that. I'll defer to uh Mr. Cut, but I think any opportunity to slow these with regards to the rear access area that might crack around the stairway on a lot of things are move around. So, I think there's an opportunity to put something there and it doesn't have to be very
large. My concern would be you're redirecting flow onto a property they never had flow and then they'll be asking why that happened to them. So, you want to use rain barrels to attenuate the runoff. I
walked in the back. It seems like it's naturally all going down that draw. It all goes that way now. Correct. That way now. So, I think you're gonna do something to attenuate the flow. That would be appropriate. I would lessen the impact and put it out a longer period of time. But
I know it's just an open lot, but it was my open lot. I'd say I get it. There are trees there in between. It's very well wooded. You had a swell there and it kind of but there's not a lot of room to do.
No, any questions from the the public for the architect? Okay. Any questions from the online? Um at this time I I as usual it's it's
um before we do a motion to it's we want to kind of codify it or exactly what we are asking to approve you know obvious there are certain waiverss and but there were discussions about this might meet the waiver so I was just wondering how we
put this in a cogent kind of thing. I mean, I guess make a motion to approve the application. However, as a condition of approval, I would
recommend that we get up updated plans within 30 60 days to reflect all the first off the second floor and everything else that was discussed. then possibly recommend um
uh some sort of attenuated drainage system um just to meet concerns just so we're not creating any trespassing on neighboring lots and also and also and well we would incorporate all the comments previously made and we want the shade tree
commissions if they want trees you'll find you have to find some trees man yeah more they could be ornamental something that is not Yeah, it's not going to create any further hazards. Yes.
May I suggest also an updated rendering that more closely resembles what the actual building is going to look like since the rendering that we're showing tonight is basically just to show us the material for the building but something that actually like is that required for segment?
a rendering not per se and from a practical perspective no one's going to see the revised rendering other than myself I think we can address the issues of where penistration is on elevations in the construction permit set so I don't think renderings are necessary
unless you feel strongly about it it's really up to you to do I'm I mean I see what this rendering looks like and I trust the design study looks similar to what we're seeing tonight what you could do then I recommend is that the
construction plans be substantially similar to what was presented. Yes. Can I get a motion to adopt the you have something to say? So make sure to be open up to the public for questions and comments for the whole application. Oh are there any uh questions from the
public for the entire application or comments this time? Anyone online? Okay. So hearing that we'll close the public portion of this hearing and I'd like to if there is one a motion to
adopt. Motion to adopt. Second. I was gonna say contingent upon all the stuff we talked about. I'll force it all together for a resolution. I know there's a lot to but to incorporate all Mr. Cassenza and Mr.
Couch's comments and what I just discussed and within 60 days. Okay. Got a roll call, please. Mr. Chen, yes. Mhazy, yes. Mr. H. Yes. Mr. Ho. Yes. Mr. Lower. Yes. Mr. Malay.
Yes. Mr. Stern Cardell. Yes. Mr. Williams. Yes. I'll just take a short bathroom break and then yes reconvene the August 14th planning board meeting with the public hearing on
the pre preliminary investigation of a condemnation area in need of redevelopment so block 2201 one lot 6 7 9 10 46 47 and 48 [Music]
you have the floor I'm going to try to share Get Uh sworn does a testimony about to give this board is the truth the whole truth and nothing about the truth. I do uh council board members of board members of the public who are listening online.
Thank you for allowing me to do this. Although you were directed by the council, so I don't think you had a choice to do this. Um, so in in a way this is sort of a long awaited action. What about the Senoku station? So we're we're here for that. Um, so as a general overview, as we typically do
my investigations, I present to uh the planning board, just get a high level summary of the I like to say detailed report. And uh so I'm going to start with a an overview of why we're doing this. Uh the scope of the study, what it
took for me to do this study, uh the context of that within the statute, and just generally some basic description of the study area. It's not just a station. uh and then the uh meat and potatoes of the presentation, the actual evaluation
and the conclusion that the report takes and the recommendations that I suggest that the planning board take relative to the recommendations you would have to the uh mayor and council. Uh so generally speaking, the study area
again uh is not just the Senoko station. Uh it's block 2201 lots 46 and 7 that is 138 140 Ran Avenue to Sokoka station. Uh lots 4748 and 10 as a separate property
known as 10 to 14 South 2nd Avenue. That's the property with the BB Bake Food Mart and Al's Professional Cleaners. And lot six is 134 Ritan Avenue. It's a residential looking structure as is lot 930 130 RA Radaran
Avenue. Uh so these are four different properties in seven lots. Uh so generally speaking over the past now 20 plus years the burrows really try to you know seek ways to make the community a vital sustainable place to live, work and play. And part of that uh includes
taking a proactive role in redevelopment plan pursuant to local redevelopment housing law uh especially within the downtown area and other commercial areas such as Cleveland Avenue Bridge and Upper. Uh beginning in 2009
uh there was actually a mixeduse project contemplated for those two residential structures 134 Avenue. It received approval from this board. Again, this is 2009. Uh, but they never pursued the project. In 2000, beginning in 2012,
there was an application for a 7-Eleven that was after, I believe, 10 meetings. It was eventually denied. Uh, actually, my colleague Jim Constantine represented the objectors and that's sort of what brought us here to this community. Um and in 2017
uh there was a larger mixeduse building considered for the same properties 130 sorry for 7-Eleven to the snow station. We're going back now to 1301 134 RAN a larger mixeduse building was considered with the concept of offsite parking. The reason for that was maybe we shouldn't
rely on park place because that's where residential homes front line. We don't want all that traffic to go through. So the idea was obviously centered on track D. has some c centralized parking but there's ways where other tracks have could have their own parking and obviously as you know over the past few
years track A and track C are proceeding in their own direction meanwhile track B has not uh for several reasons um so that concept of a larger mixeduse building on what we're calling track B
uh was considered and after we did the area study for gun and A year later that we did the redevelopment plan for tracks A through D really central centered on the concept of centralized parking perhaps the plaza north third which became south third
after public comment um and track B was sort of folded into the application because they already had the developer rare and ready to go. So we folded that concept into the plan whereas everything else is more or less for our own. We're trying to get RFPs get interesting. we would like to get downtown moving. Um,
and so in 2022, we did do the RFP process. They selected redevelopers for tracks A and C. They're moving along. We expanded track C as a result of negotiations on a concept plan 2023. Then we amended the plan after expanding the designation and working further with
the offer for track team. And then just a few months ago, we did a um condominum study for the classic cleaners. So, um, really an overview, there have been multiple applications, three at
least, for several properties within this study, but they never pursue been pursued or even approved. Uh, and all these properties have had extended vacancies over years, which I'll describe later. Um, there has been progress again at tracks A and C, but track B really hasn't been able to
figure out the off-site parking. We're not going to let them by virtue of a redone agreement. can't still not let them proceed until they figure that out. But 10 years uh and I think the community including this board, members of council, members of the public, ourselves included, asked, you know,
there's been a lack of of progress. Why not focus on what's the deal with that? Uh so we hear you. Um, mayor and council authorized planning board to conduct this study and as required by the local redevelop housing law. In that
resolution to authorize a study, you have to declare whether or not you may or may not use um redevelopment. But what that really means coming since 2013, the state requires that when you do your resolution, if you're going if you're not going to use emit domain,
just call a non- combination area. If you may use it, you have to say upfront you may use it. We're going to call it a combination area. You don't. That does not mean the barrel is required to or has to. It's just that they know. Um in terms of the scope of study, we've
done this few of these before. So reiterate, I try to do a very detailed study. Do inventory of all the records and site inspection, review records for planning and zoning, construction health, fire, police tax. I get a lot of help. I appreciate uh all the staff assisting me on that. Um much more
helpful than other communities around the state. I also look at environmental reports and sometimes I lean on the burough's other experts such as the LSRP to kind of make sense of what's the status of the environmental data as well as our own GIS map review tax maps, zoning ordinance, master plan. And then
of course the fun part is doing site inspections. And you'll see some photos and believe me I had so much fun with this one. Um, and then obviously prepare the ask report. I I think it's hopefully easy to read even though it's very long.
Uh, try to write in a way where try to break it down into easier bites and understand why we're doing it, why it meets the criteria, and make clear what the recommendations are. Um, as you know, the statute is pretty simple. It's really to guide the municipalities
through the rehabilitation redevelopment efforts. The advantages of doing that obviously it's more flexibility than zoning. You do sight specific concept plans and regulations really you're being proactive about development. Whereas when you do typical site plan applications whether it's planning or
zoning you're always reacting. Can we have more trees? Can we do that? I'm not sure about the parking. But for redevelopment you're working together as a public private partnership. And there's also opportunities to require sustainability green infrastructure similar to what we saw on the last application. they were required to do it
and they're going to do it because we put in ter it's hard to do that through a zoning ordinance and of course you can designate uh a specific redeveloper to do a project uh it could just be the land develop land owner uh and define their obligations which could include
contributions and community benefits uh and redevelopment obviously been successful used throughout the state including in park these are just two examples I use often and I think they're very well done um I'm proud that ever since 2016 came in, we're seeing these happen and it's slowly but surely coming
along um and really coming in place. the statute requires a very very specific procedural um sequence and we are just sort of in the beginning of that step even though there's been other planning uh related to track B the 2005 plan and so on and
so forth but we're what we're really are is in the middle of that efforts where we prepare the report hold a public meeting you're supposed to hear what I have to say in terms of why I think the property does or does not meet the criteria for redevelopment to hear any from comments from the public any
objectors and so on and so forth. Uh what your your role is is to whether you agree or disagree with the report whether the property does or does not meet the area of redevelopment and then make recommendations by a resolution to the governing body.
Um in terms of the redevelopment statute uh there's eight of them. Uh just briefly uh A is about substandard living conditions or working conditions. bees abandoned properties for at least two years. That was recently amended a few years ago to clarify two conse
consecutive years. Uh public C is public or unimproved vacant land but for 10 years or more. D is faulty range of design. E is ownership and title issues. Not just that there's inefficiency or not fully conducted but it's as a result of ownership and title issues. F it's
really about five years of um damage from fire and natural disasters. G urban enterprise zones which does not apply to um on the park and smart growth consistency. There's also section three criteria which is really section three of the statute which is a definition
section. It literally is the definition of a redevelopment area and that is one which may include properties not meeting the criteria uh but the inclusion of which is found necessary uh with or without changing their condition for the effective red. That's important because
in this study I am using the section three criteria for two of the properties. And of course the readon handbook now third edition says you can include these properties if they're essentially being included in the destination. What's weird about that is of course you're doing a study in order to do redevelopment plan. But if you're
using that section three criteria, you have to have some sort of foresight of a redevelopment plan that hasn't existed yet. In this case, we actually benefit from multiple redone plans affecting these properties. actually makes my job and your job a lot easier. And um this
is I just want to put this slide together because I I say this anyway, but I just want to reiterate this is not the windshield study. I'm not in my car going, "Yeah, it meets it." And I you can't rely on me saying just reciting the statutes. It meets it because of that. Like you it should be based on a
depth analysis. And there's case law that supports that. And frankly, you just have to really rely on the plain meeting of the criteria. shouldn't go into uh fits to try to see whether it meets a criteria because the benefit of the redundant criteria you just need to
meet one of them to declare whether property is needed redevelopment. Um with going back to the age criteria that's a smart growth consistency I put in the report just something I wrote for Camden um recently which is actually a good primer of
why what what does the section H what does the criteria in H mean in terms of smart growth consistency obviously with regards to these statutory criteria these are based on existing conditions that uh really to show that the property
is has you know obsolete design or there's some substandard condition whereas smart growth is looking at the future. It's a little bit different. So planners like myself tend to get a little skittish about whether to use the section H uh sorry the criterion H uh in
read on plans especially when it comes to non uh to condemnation primary reports. So you'll see that I did not rely on the criterion H for this study because this is a condemnation theory. I want to rely on the physical features uh
issues instead of forward thinking. So uh in terms of the existing conditions uh outlined in white sure you can see on the screen hopefully on a PDF or your printed copy you'll see these are seven lots altogether less than one
acre. So I'm talking little bit tiny property uh in little old H Highland Park. Varian ownership. Two lots lots six and nine are the same owner. Uh and then the Sonoko is one other owner and then the BB Bakes property is another owner. So it's varying ownership. Uh I
didn't have a slide for this but the report shows that the assessment value assess improvement value is less than the land improvement value which suggests that there's some inefficiency of the uh property which is especially critical in a downtown area but we're
not using that as reliance for this um criterion. I didn't understand that statement. Sure. uh the assessed improvement value is less than the assessed land value which suggests that the property is generally underutilized especially in a downtown area but that doesn't mean that
it meets a certain criteria. I think years ago planners used to and as a result case law like not touching that but it just shows that there's an inefficiency and uh of these properties um particularly in downtown area. Uh the SNoka station obviously is an active
site on the state's environmental management system list. I recall one of the members of the public brought that up. What's the deal with that? Well, it's in their report that's pending now. We're here for that. Uh otherwise, this study area and much of the area in the downtown area, it there's no wetlands, no flood hazard areas, and it's well
served by utilities. Uh obviously, you can see on the left map the existing land use map. It's a mix of uses and even though they're all vacant, I have to show them it's current use. Vacant land is when there's no building, no parking lot. So technically not vacant but the the tenencies are vacant. Uh and
on the right side you'll see that the um study area is subject to one two three four different zoning destinations two of which are redevelopment plans. So it's a mixed bag in terms of land use as well as zoning which is not ideal for redeveloping because you have to
reconcile all that. So now uh the fun part. So this is the actual evaluation as to whether or not I believe that the properties four of them four properties uh meet the criteria. U you'll see at the end end the report
that I it's my opinion that all four do meet at least one of criteria. So I'm going to go through just a high level of why I think each one of them are. We're going to start with so station block 2201 lot 1746. Uh the previous findings, it actually was already designated as an area
redevelopment 20 years ago and then it was put into the 2005 redevelopment plan. Uh it was used at the gas station since before World War II. The current building with additions was built in 1954 uh with additions over the years. Um there's been no permits since 2011,
which is a demolition per uh the gas stations obviously closed for almost 16 years or if not more than 16 years. And as we discussed before in 2012, can't believe it's already that long ago. Um there was consideration from 7-Eleven, but that was denied and there's been
some multiple calls for criminal misstripes related to um spray painting. Otherwise, not much happening there because it's been vacant for 16 years. Uh with regard to environmental contamination, uh so get ready for this. So I just want to give a high level. So the first report of contamination
occurred in January 1990 and still remains contaminated to this day. So 35 plus years of contamination. Um so it started in 1991 PSG noticed there was gas sitting in a manhole uh in the street and I believe the plume was identified to affect the street as well
as uh the property in question. Uh 1992 a small waste oil USD was removed. They found impacted soils. Uh but the geologist at the time said no harm, no foul, no further action but hey we observed that there's groundwater remediation going on. They saw 11 wells at the time. A year later, the property
owner wanted to remove the whole system or really upgrade it and they found a crack in the rib and when they uh removed the gas from the tank, the tank floated to the top of the water table. And then when they removed the tank, they found that it was leaking. So
another report was uh filed with NGDP 1993 obviously is leaking. And over the course of several years 94 to 2001 they did an active well I guess you can call it passive groundwater remediation program through attenuation
um in 2012 I should 10 by this time 2010 the gas stations already closed so the in 1993 when the three tank system was removed two new tanks were put in in 2010 those two tanks were removed uh there was soil contamination but it was
addressed uh but they found that there was still needed um to test for and address groundwater contamination. It was still ongoing at the time. Uh in 2012, this is at the time of due diligence for the 7-Eleven facility. And I um based on the minutes and the
resolutions and letters uh many of which Alan Williams was the author of them was asking what's the status, what's the when's the REO coming, when's this being rectified? Because this board had a keen interest on how this is being addressed. Basically, what it come came down to was it's got to be addressed. we're going to
get a RAO, a remedial action outcome, but it it never really occurred. Uh 2014, a groundwater uh remedial action permit was issued uh really based on we're going to continue to do natural attenuation as if the the prior 25 years didn't
work. So to keep doing natural attenuation and the RAO basically the outcome, the final deliverable goal is anticipated to be in sometime in 2022. So it's a 8-year program coming in 2022. still groundwater attenuation uh sorry
groundwater contamination and in 2023 the graph was extended to 2029. Basically what this means after consulting with the LSRP is that there are conditions that suggest that the attenuation is not working and further
um intervention may be necessary. So this is a 35 year history of contamination at the site. So, I'm going to go into the actual site inspections. Uh, I'll try to run through these as high level as I can without
skipping. So, what we found with the exterior buildings really poor condition, peeling paint, some water damage, and actually it looks like uh vehicles uh damaged the building as well. Uh we found that there was some water damage on the outside, water staining on a block wall. Obviously, the
buildings all boarded up, but when we went inside, we noticed doors, some doors and windows were broken. the glasses sort of on the ground on inside the building. On the interior is also poor condition, poor uh poor poor condition, water staining, water damage
on the floors and wall and some wood rot where there was wood since it's mostly a block building. Uh we found that the water was still running and leaking. Um the when the maintenance person that I helped us with the inspection, us myself and Scott Pressure uh construction code
official, he assisted me on the inspection. We found that the water was still leaking. It's the best that's the bottom left photo. They thought they had turned all the water off. This is like a second meter. They didn't know about it. Uh and then elsewhere in a building, the ceilings I say ceilings coral above the
toilet room called there's no sink and no finished uh uh materials uh was had collapsed onto the toilet. Uh this is a shed behind the gas station. This was actually a shed that was built in 1993. It went to the zoning board of
adjustment for a site plan. This shed was built for a really for the groundwater remediation effort uh to do they had a water stripping tower a stripping tower uh a holding tank and some other equipment to deal with the um
groundwater remediation project. Um so and this was ongoing for about eight years 1994 to 2001 after it construction 93 obviously this building this accessory structure we call it shed severe disappeared the roofs cave in open to the element and there's plant growth uh going inside the building and
there was some u insulation debris and uh whatnot all over the ground uh rear yard obviously was all paved at one point but debris is growing through there's leftover tires from I presumably from 16 years ago still there. That's a concern for mosquito breeding and
there's an abandoned vehicle that's driftwood for parks. Uh the parking lot in general uh is a not non-conforming with zoning. It's in the front of the building. We do not allow that downtown. Uh but that's and it's not conforming to the zoning the redevelopment plan as
well as just general best practices of downtown area. And this as we identified in master plan the community said this is a large gap. They use the word gap in the streetscape. A huge gap, 150 ft of nothing but asphalt and oversized uh driveway havens.
U obviously this impacts aesthetics and discurs pedestrian activity and economic vitality which is detrimental to the welfare community. Uh with regards to the actual layout and design, there's very little definition to this parking lot. It's simply just a mass of pavement. There's no defined parking
spaces. There's no drive aisles. users could just do whatever they want and they spin around if they were to trespass on a site which creates a dangerous conditions for people walking on the site. Um as to the uh accessible parking spaces there are
it's required to be 16 ft wide van accessible. does not meet that and obviously the conditions are such that it is not accept it is not accessible to to get to the building and so it's undersized and pavement is repair simply just not accessible in terms of landscape buffers there's really no
buffer between the building and the ret and the retaining wall so you can just hit the building and damage the building that looks like retaining wall is already suffering some damage uh and probably most critically there is no buffer along the public side that's the top right photo walking
through that parking lot just like with the classic cleaner property and other properties that we study. This condition is dangerous because motorists can go in and out of the parking lot uh without any and the pedestrian has no protection whatsoever. Uh and also there's uh this
excess pavement on the well what was supposed to be a landscape buffer within south second. That's the bottom left photo. That's supposed to be a landscape vinyl that's paved over. So obviously an illegal parking space and that damages trees and does not allow for further growth. So this all just exacerbates the
heat island effect that tree won't grow any further and have to probably die if not already and um so this shows that there's excess excessive pavement and the condition will make the heat on effect even worse over time and which will make the effect all the neighboring
properties as well. uh the oversized curves. Uh so there's not one, not two, not three, but there's four driveways for this property along Ren Avenue. There's three of them, and they all range from uh 22
to 38 ft, but typical driveway is typically 12 to 18 one way, 20 to 24 feet two-way. Um and so it the driveways occupy nearly twothirds of the frontage. And the the raised curve is less than six inches in between those driveways. So it's very um shallow giving the
appearance that this is one giant 150 foot wide driveway. Obviously extremely dangerous uh to the public. And on south second this is the right side. The aprons is simply not done correctly. It's monolithic pore and it's jutting
into the street. And let's see. So all right. So the conditions of the property generally in poor condition. there is really uh indicative of the long-term vacancies of the property. Um so these conditions deterioration
barriers depression settlement missing pavement altogether uh these will contribute to ponding freeze fall uh slip hazards in winter mosquito and fall and obviously pests in terms of land coverage. discuss this already at length. Uh there's excessive land
coverage. Um in terms of if this lot was to repave in the front, um there would not be sufficient space to order to construct a conforming parking lot. There's simply not enough depth 18 24 in
a in a walkway. Simply not enough space to put a conforming parking lot. And the rear parking lot was intended for storage. really can't be reused for a rear parking for a public facility because it was designed for tandem parking of
uh cars for storage or awaiting repair. If it was if this became a new store, you won't get 16 parking spaces back there. You're going to get maybe six. Uh so it's an inefficient use of land uh and high degree excessive pavement relative to the number of parking spaces that could be provided legally simply
shows that um you know the lack and with Alaska landscape lines and the lack of street trees and shade trees means that uh this all contributes negatively to the heon effect. terms of obsolescence uh did a little
bit narrative on that and that is so generally speaking there's always going to be a need for gasoline service stations no matter how hard we push for EV uh there's always going to still be a need for gasoline service stations uh and service stations really evolved over the years since its inception it really
began like at this location as a small roadside stop and over the years it's evolved to do tire changes and services and even larger to like the giant waw or bies if you've been to one in Florence, South Carolina. Uh so it's definitely
transformed over the years, but in small downtowns like Highland Park, they can still be relevant if they have uh space for a store and other maybe EV parking or EV charging stations, but that's not possible here because of the issues I raised before uh because there's not
enough room to put a conforming parking lot. They're kind of stuck. So the 7-Eleven application actually alluded to the fact that well in order to even keep it a gas station they need to be redeveloped. So I think that says a lot about uh that particular application. Um so in in the end what this suggests
is that these conditions do not lend itself to be used as a gas station today. So it just means that it's no longer useful today in its current condition and is functionally obsolete. So in summary, uh the substandard conditions in a building is is conducive
to unh wholesome working conditions. A hits A. It's been vacant for more than two years. At 16, hits B. And obviously the obsolescence faulty range of design hits D. Um so for those three criteria, you only hit one. I found three criteria that could rely on to suggest that the
synoko station meets the criteria for combination. Uh the other three go a little bit faster I promise. Uh so this is 20 block 2201 lots 474810 10 104 South Second Avenue. This is the 58 food mark
property also included cleaners. So this property was not part of the uh any prior redevelopment activities. It's still zone CBD and PO meaning it's split zone. So the left side of property is actually in a zone where it only allows offices and single family dwellings and
yet it's a store with a front parking lot. Obviously not conforming. Uh so it's used at the strip center with multiple stores. I believe it was Hubards at first and now well was ED based food. Permits been um taken out pretty regularly over the years. Um
including permits where cars damaged storefronts on multiple occasions. So permits were taken out to repair storefronts. Uh the BB Bakes Food Mart has been vacant for more than seven years and Alice Professional Cleaners more than four years. So collectively that means the whole building and the
property has been vacant for at least two years. So as you'll see that hits B. In terms of the actual site inspections, uh again the exterior is generally in fair to poor condition. There's some chipping paint. Uh I got exposed wiring and there's some sealant and cocking
missing on the windows. So the building's not airtight or waterproof. So, water infiltrates into the building. Uh, on the outside of the building, there's some missing down spouses, trash and debris everywhere. I didn't have the photo, but I remember someone actually came into Burough Hall a week or two ago
and had a photo of an overflowing trash can, and I was going, "Yep, just give me a couple weeks and I'll show it to you." I did put the photo in, but nothing's changed. Trash everywhere in the front of the building. Uh in terms of the building, the roof structure, the the eaves at the end of
the property, uh sorry, the ends of the building are exhibit wood rot. So wood and uh the water infiltration getting into the building uh and then obviously that's subject to to pests and there's a large depression on the roof structure which suggests that there might be water damage inside the building. Inside the
building itself is now starting with BB Bigs. Uh the it looked like the building was completely abandoned. There's still some food out there. There's still some water in storage and they're obviously expired goods. And when I said this was fun, when I took a closer look at the top right photo, those are pest
droppings. There's thousands of pest dropping. So, I had to get rid of my shoes after this. Um, also in the kitchen area, there's some food waste still there, which is probably from seven years ago and still there. And then, uh, obviously there's deterioration throughout, water damage,
uh, and so on and so forth. There's water infiltration in the refrigeration area. There's some open pipes in the mechanical room. Uh in Al Al's cleaners, Al's professional cleaner. I think it's cleaners. That's my my fault. Uh there's some water infiltration underneath the equipment. Uh missing tiles uh and just
unfinished conditions. In the back of that building, there's a small shed, I think, built for a to boiler room, and for some reason, there's a down spout in the middle of the room. It's obviously that Sammy block in the center photo, that's the old down spout in 1971. They built around it. Not sure what that
means with insulation around it. U but otherwise in the other side of the building, the right side of the building, you'll see that there's corroded rust everywhere. Insulation's falling and the door that's supposed to be secure is open to the elements. I just walked right in with no key. I was given permission to trespass. Uh
so at the side and rear of the building, uh this is simply a fire hazard. Trash and debris everywhere. Uh the retaining walls is a concern as well. uh they're they're deteriorating and uh frankly they're at a risk of failure just horizontal and vertical
displacement and there's some ivy and plant growth growing into the retaining wall. What happen that means is that as they grow and expand and there's ponding sorry free law that will just exacerbate that issue. So this concern of mine, I'm
not a structural engineer, but this is at a risk of failure. And there's uh at least three decaying walls on the property. Uh similar to the Senoka station has a non-performing parking area at the front of the building. This actually has the proper depth, but it still lacks the lack of
buffers uh between a parking area and the sidewalk. But what makes this worse in this case is that the parking lot is pretty much squared off. So you have parking spaces all all the way to the end property. That means when they try to back out, they have to use more
distance and more maneuverability and able to do almost a full K turn to exit. But when you do that, the halfhazard turn, you're more than likely to go into the public sidewalk and risk pedestrian strike. Obviously, that hasn't been an issue as of late because again, it's
been vacant for seven years and appears to be used as parking for the a reformed church. Again, we have oversized curve cuts. These are about 25 ft wide. Generally oversized uh but taken together, it's about occupies I believe
I said it was over 23 o nearly half of the frontage of the property. And again, this in inefficient use of land uh and design which contributes to long walking distances which is dangerous for pedestrians and so that obviously illogical driving
movements just makes that matters worse. Terms of the conditions, it's in fair condition. The pro the parking lot looks like it was repaved only a few years ago. Again showing signs of deterioration, depression settlement funding, etc., etc. Same conditions as u
as no station. There's no storm water management, so water just simply sheet flows onto the public sidewalk and there's a lot of pavement to opportunities for infiltration. Uh so in summary, obviously we already talked about vacancy. It automatically hits that easy.
uh in terms of the analysis I my opinion the building a substandard living uh sorry not living working condition unh wholesome working conditions and again there's faulty range of design and other deteriorating conditions uh so it means a b and d now moving on to one of the
houses this is 134 grading avenue block number six block 2201 uh in terms of the fire designation it was already previously designated area in 2005 so they're simply doing it again 20 years later. This is part of the 2005
redon plan as well as what we call track B in the 2021 now amended 2024 redone plan. There were concepts considered in 2009 as I mentioned before as well as 2017 but they haven't not been able to to uh secure off-site parking. So
nothing's happened stagnant. It was last used as office space. You know, it looks like a house. Um, and there been no permits since 2012 and was registered as a vacant property in 2021. So, at least two years. Already it hits criteria B because it's a commercial use. uh what
we found through the records of broken water pipes, mis tax payments and leans and eventually they were redeemed and settled, but there's been a pattern of mis tax payments and leans uh and as well as conditions on property uh conducive to unh wholesome working conditions. Exterior building is
generally in disrepair. The porch is literally falling apart. Uh and the railings are not secure. I almost actually fell. There's trash and debris everywhere. The spindles and the railings are broken. The building looks like it's was recently resided, but it's just lipstick on a pig because
underneath it is deteriorating wood, wood rot, and water infiltration. Uh, at the back of the building is a is a this is supposed to be a rear porch. Now, see the roof caved in. There's trash and debris everywhere. Um, might be better if I had a video of this because there
was trash everywhere. Uh, as well as u building materials inside the building. Uh, this is on this is both a person's second floor. This is again this is office space even though it looks like a house still. Uh there's peeling paint everywhere. Ceiling walls and on the floor ceiling towels caved in and
kitchen damage all over the kitchen. Uh and the tub in the bathroom upstairs starts showing some deterioration which suggested there might be water infiltration in the basement. Uh the basement windows weren't secure. They're also boarded up but you can push it open
pretty easily. Um, and then a water heater and equipment was abandoned and the the furnace according to the construction code official. I was touching that pipe and he said, "Don't do that. That's as best." Okay. So, I won't do that. Uh, front side and rear yards is
generally in disrepair. Uh, overgrown uh vegetation. The wood railing uh rail blocks are in disrepair. So, the railing is it's kind of loose. And so, when I grabbed it to go upstairs, I almost fell. Uh, and the backyard is actually paved,
but it's, you know, everything's grown through it over the years, and there's an abandoned vehicle. I I believe someone passed away. Uh, and the vehicle is still there. Uh, in terms of the faltering design, this was actually raised in the 2005 report. So, I'm sort of reiterating, but go a little bit more
detail about why it's a faltering range design. So, in the 2005 study, there was a number of conditions that we just discussed the steep slopes to high score. uh that's not conducive to commercial development uh in its current form and that's because uh and that
generally means they cannot really positively contribute to the downtown area due to the lack of buffers uh and the condition of the grade change reactivating commercial use actually create a strain on the community because
um there's really limited access to rear uh both in terms of access as well as parking. there actually has no space to park or design a conforming parking lot on this lot alone and then obviously access will go through park place which will negatively impact the residents who
live on that street as well as in the neighborhood. Um so in order to address that you could build a driveway on rarity but that's not permitted. Plus if you put a driveway on this property you have to de demolish the building because the lot's so narrow. Uh so there really is no way
to reactivate this building in its current form as commercial use. Plus if there's a change of use they'll upgrade it to ADA standards which simply is not possible and cost prohibited. Um this building frankly is better suited as a home but that's not permitted in the red
plan. So the current form of the property, the size and shape of the property and the disposition of the improvements of the property uh really is a barrier to revitalization and suppresses economic vitality and its obsolete layout is
detrimental to wealthier community. And you'll see I'll I'll incorporate by reference the same argument I'm making for the this next slot, the last slot, lot number six next door. Um this is uh actually I think this is a
Sorry, the prior law is 13. This is 134. I got my mic addressed wrong. I'll address that. Oh, sorry. Going too fast. This is the summary of the house. We just did 134. So, as I indicated, the property has
substandard conditions conducive to unh wholesome working conditions. Uh, so criteria A, vacant for more than two years. Criteria B, pretty easy. Faulty arrangement design obsolete layout detrimental community D. Now section three criteria I mentioned before um
this is actually similar to the classic cleaners argument. This is the hole and a donut because as you know with the track B lot six needs lot nine in order to be redeveloped and the same argument made for that property as well. Lot nine needs lot six to redevelop by virtue of
that uh redevelopment plan. Plus it also is a hole in the donut of the 2005 redevelopment plan. and likely the hole in the donut if we were to pursue a different redevelopment plan that considers this study area as a new project. So multiple ways this meets the criteria with the intent and purpose of
section three criteria. Also this was raised at the last meeting too. They say oh well if you said section three that means does you I'm not saying it meets ABD. That's not the point I'm trying to make. I want to make it clear on the record that it meets AB and D. But if for some reason you disagree, you can
rely on section three. This is the last property, the house next door next to the Mary rest restaurant. Uh again, this property was designated area redevelopment 2005 and as part of their 2005 um readout plan and it again is part of the track B at
the 2021 and amended 2024 readout plan. And someone comments as the lot other property uh lot with the other lot taken together was a concept we're considered in 2009 and 2017 for mixeduse buildings and again did not pursue and were unable
to secure off-site apartments. Uh this building was last used as a commercial space with an apartment above it. Um that's important because the section B criteria of criterion B refers to only commercial spaces. Has no indication in
the statute that I can include a mixeduse use a mixeduse property or one that includes residential because there is residential use here. We cannot use criteria B. Just want to make that clear. Uh there's been some calls for theft and burglary. Again, another burst
water pipe. Actually, this is recent. Uh I actually had to call DPW because the water department calls so we assisted on that and there's a reg pattern of mis payments and tax lanes but they've been redeemed with the new property owner a few years ago and the property was vacant in u register vacant property in
2025. Another reason why we can't use criteria B because in that statute uh has to be at least two consented years. Building exterior similar to the um other property poor condition, lack of maintenance which is really indicative of the long-term vacancies, the chipping
paint, water damage, wood rot, just missing elements all together, trash and debris under the porch as well as block access to the two units. There's a downstairs unit, well really it's the upper ground floor unit and there's a second floor unit. Um, in the back of the property there's this I I guess you
can call it a quartz. There's some sheathing on the side and it's completely rotted um away and uh see what else. It's peeling away. It's rotted. There's mold. There's railings are broken. The roof is damaged. And again, there's trash and debris blocks access to the back door. And when I look
through the second floor window, there's no shingles. So, and there's at the time it was snow had fallen. So, there's ponding of water on the roof. Uh on the lower levels, that's a that's
a basement window. It's not a fixed at all. I pushed it and it swung around like a carousel. Uh and obviously the rest of the building, the uh siding is in complete disrepair. Wood rot and water infiltration. And it's my understanding, I don't believe I put this in report, but the
property owners said that one of these two properties there was squatters. And you saw there was easy access to the building by just pushing the window open. So frankly, I'm not surprised. But when I did my inspection with Mr. Pressure, we did not see any squatters. Uh on the inside of the building, there
is apparently a water leak which still hasn't been addressed. Uh well, the damage from the water leak hasn't been addressed. So obviously the floor is warped away and the ceiling tiles crashed into the a residential refrigerator and a triple compartment sink. Again, this is a commercial space.
Kind of looks like a quasi home office. It's it's the strangest space I've been in. On the second floor unit, there's mold pretty much everywhere. Pretty disgusting. Uh I might have lost a few years of my life in that building. Uh in the basement, there's again more
mold and water infiltration. Basic trash. And it looked like it had been abandoned. And the top right was interesting. That's a toilet in the middle of the room. So if you wanted a toilet, a house with a toilet open to the room, you got one there.
I think the bathroom was probably built to SK uh built to code, but the room probably not. Plus, it's also not clear whose space that is. Again, the first floor is its own key unit. Second floor is it own key unit. Two different tenencies. It's not clear how the
basement is um utilized in that regard. The front yard is actually not as bad as the other property, but the stone uh stairway is in disrepair. It's on an angle on chipping paint. I when I first did my inspection, it was when it was snowing and sleeping and I slipped, you
know, fell down the stairs. Uh, still smarting on that. The rear yard area again was supposed to be, well, not supposed to be. It was paved, but you can't tell anymore because it's leaves and debris everywhere. And the same argument about faltering design. Uh, this property cannot be reactivated on
its own as a commercial use because it's simply too narrow. You can't put a conforming parking lot in the back. you have to access them every year which would negatively impact the neighbors on park place and neighboring streets and to put a parking lot uh driveway from Ritan into the lot would mean demolishing the building so it's not
possible to reactivate commercial use again it would be better as a home but it's not permitted uh so the summary here is the same well similar as the other house except for criteria being I find that this has substandard conditions to unh wholesome working conditions as well as living I did not
put that on the slide so S meets criteria A if al faltering design obviously lay out other factors. D and again the same argument lot nine needs lot six to be developed. It's a hole in the donut with each other. So you can rely on section three if for some reason you were disagreeing that criteria
criterion A or D. Right? So that's the conclusion of the report for separate properties. They all meet at least um two of the criteria if not the section three criteria. Uh my recommendation is for the planning board to advise the
mayor and council that this property does meet the criteria as a combination area at all. Any questions? Thank you for your report. Um for the last property 130 rare tent,
when was the last time this property was occupied by a tenant? I know that you said we like registered a statement in 2025, but prior to that, do we know like when's the last time someone non squatter? Uh, that will be I don't mean to be
rude, that' be almost impossible to tell. So, I'm just relying on records. Um, I saw police reports about the resident who lived in the apartment observing an incident in the street within the past couple years. Um, but there's a gap in records. Obviously, there's not much of anything on this property. All I have is that the
property is vacant as of February 2025. That doesn't mean it's only been vacant for what, six months. It could be longer, but I can't u assume that's two years or more. And Chris, I sorry.
No, no, no. No, I just it is appalling the condition of this property and it is absolutely appalling to me that there would be people living in this property subject to the condition of this property and actually paying someone rent. I think I mean I
know this is maybe not the appropriate venue but I feel like I have to say this as a burrow we have to do better by the residents that live here to make sure that people our neighbors are not living in these conditions and that the home around a house like this are not subject
to have to put up with the effects of living next to a home in this condition. I I can't understand how this could happen that I know that when a landlord um leases an
apartment to a tenant, they have to get a certificate of occupancy and this isn't being followed up on. There's like a record of new tenants who have to register your property for rent. So there should be some checkpoints so that
we have I mean we have these things in place and landlords should be fined for this. This is abhorrent. No one should be living like this. For the health department I saw in your report didn't respond and I guess there were no calls to the health department about these conditions but oftentimes people living
in these conditions um may not feel like they are in a position to report the landlord in these conditions. I'm just very saddened by seeing this and I mean this is I'm I'm sorry that you had to experience this. I'm pretty sure your lungs were hurting from breathing in
that moment. Uh yeah, I think I got sick afterwards, but it's also winter time. U just to comment on the health department. It's not that they didn't respond to calls. There may be records. I just not did not receive them. Okay. Any other questions? Chris, how is this
how is this study different from the last one you did or all we we've been through this before? I don't think I'm prepared to go into detail about the exact differences uh but that the properties that were in the
2005 study which probably began in 2004 um which is the Soka gas station and the two homes next to it. They were deemed air indeed for a lot of the same reasons from what I heard. Almost all the same.
Yes. And I think at the time, and it might apply to at least one of the houses, there was discussion about the Sinoco station was using one of them, likely 134 Ronin as basically a junkyard for vehicles. Um, I think that's in the
report and I have the planning war resolution from the time discussing that at length. Obviously, that's irrelevant now because it's not there anymore, but you can see the remnants of it because it's broken pavement everywhere. And that one car that's still there uh was
from the gentleman that passed away that recently. Did you ever talk to Alan about that application? Uh, no. I was there. Any other questions? I got a Hey, this is a minor thing, but on the on the cover here, um, on the various pictures
you've shown, it has in the back of the soco, I think kind of like if you're facing the so station, the right side behind that where it goes behind the shopping plaza on all the pictures here on like Google Earth and everything, that's full. There's like 15 cars back there. And you mentioned that there's
one that's like all chopped up and everything. Are the rest of them all gone? They're not there anymore. Okay. Yeah. So, the photo was a snap. a snip really from Google Maps. Yeah. Uh I didn't check the precise date of the publication. It seems to imply it
was recent. So I actually frankly surprised to see that. And part of it's intentional to keep it in there. So that your eagle eye noticing all the cars back there was I'm glad you caught it. It's like it's like one of those um Mickey Mouse heads like you find it. Um
but obviously that's not the condition today. It's just a representative cover photo. Gotcha. Any other questions or comments? Yes. Yeah. Just um first of all, I want to say thank you for risking your life for us. We really appreciate that. And and I also appreciate the
thoroughess of of the report. Um to to your to your point, I full stop 100%. We ought to be making sure that this doesn't happen. I do want to point out that I think it has been vacant for a lot longer than six months and a lot longer than that because it's part of
track B and when track B was going through the process of getting their approvals for originally 16 units and then ultimately 32 units they had moved everybody out and that was I think 2017 2018. So it's my guess is it's been abandoned since 2017 or 2018.
So there's no one's been living there. I again I don't want to say that for sure. I just want to say that that as part of of track B, my guess is that they they moved everybody out because they were expecting they were going to going to going to build on that. So um and then just I wanted to point out I know everybody has read this uh report in
detail but I just I I have to read this that on page 38 in the report it says in 1977 an application for preliminary and final major site plan approval was granted by the planning board um uh to eliminate from Riden Avenue one of the
worst eyes in town. And that was written into the planning board report in 1977 along as they had to have the installation of holding tanks for unlinered gas gasoline required by the new cars at the time. So
Bruce was here you were here for I don't know if you were here Bruce but in 1977 they were excited by this and was going to get rid of this. I say it's about time. So thank you very much. I was probably at a great concert.
So like to entertain them. How should we do this? It's all being brought up. Even though there are different criterias for different lots, we are going to vote on the entire package. Is that correct? Is that the
I'll defer to council, but it sounds like there's no push back on any of the criteria. I recall I did one in the fall 23 and I think we did individual lots but if we're does there's more controversy with that one so we're fine with just
one in my opinion especially the we have AB and D for three out of the four sections and then the final building uh we do have I believe A and D I think or whatever the Anyway there's solid u
criteria for all four lots I would propose that We um make a let's say a combined or blanket one vote. Yeah, you can accept the findings of the
report but collectively and ultimately in the end um you're declaring or recommending that the entire study area uh be declared a combination area. I'd like to hear a motion on that statement. Should we open up the public for comments?
Oh, I'm sorry. Is there any Seeing no public in the chambers. Are there any public statements from the Oh, no, there's not. Okay. All right. Thank you for reminding me. I'll entertain a motion. I'll move to accept the report.
Second, Mr. Williams, I guess. All right. Roll call. Yes, yes, Mr. H. Absolutely. Yes, Mr. Ho. Yes, please. Mr. L.
Yes, yes, Mr. Cardinal. Yes, Mr. Um, just in so we'll run through the rest. Any correspondence from zoning board officers? Not here. Uh any other
matters? Any public comment out there for any other matters? Not pertaining. So, uh I'd like to then anybody have anything else to say at this time? If I could just say real quick on No, that's August 20th from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. is an
open house about Third Avenue. So, um it's'll be a chance to come and see um what some of the ideas are, what some of the Sorry, could you repeat the time? It's August 20th from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. at the community center. Um so, it's a drop by, so you can come in anytime during that. Um but please come. You'll
see some of the things going on with with Third Avenue. So, it's been exciting and moving forward. So, your motion to adjurnn. Motion to adjurnn. Second. Second.
All right. All those in favor? I All right. And take care everyone. We got a lot of work done. Thank you.