there's a lot on I don't know good evening and welcome to the April 10th 2025 Georgia City Zoning Board of Adjustment this meeting is held in accordance with NJSA10 col4-12 the Open Public Meetings Act i
would like to call this meeting to order i'm asking Mr beasley can you please take attendance roll call yes I see uh Commissioner Baron Commissioner Bole here Commissioner
Burns here Commissioner Allen here and Vice Chair Rule here and Chair Coyle present and we have quorum thank you okay are there any uh sunshine announcements that you would like to share with us yes in accordance with the
open public's meeting act um notice has been provided to Bergen Record LS Bito as well as posted with the city clerk um I'd like to mark this um into evidence as uh B1 vinnie Vinnie what he's putting
something into evidence yes okay yes sure okay please stand for the PL flag p flag salute i pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands one nation
under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all okay Iris can you swear in staff do you swear that the this evening and thank you okay um Eric are
there any uh correspondents or Germans that you need to share with us no correspondents or Germans to share at this time Madam Chair thank you um so before we begin I would just like to let everyone know that we will not begin any new cases uh after 10:00 and any members
of the public that have any comments they will be limited to 3 minutes and uh Mr allen will be uh taking timing everyone okay so our first case this
evening is um 285 and a half Third Street which is case Z2025-000022 is that better yes i thought we were doing this apologies uh so good evening everyone michael Higgins uh on behalf of the applicant Joseph Lind um this is a
project that was previously approved uh back in December December 3rd of 2020 uh the approval is expired the applicant seeking an extension to December 3rd of this year to procure financing and complete the project uh that that's
essentially the uh Did you So did you say December 3rd because it's showing here that you're looking for three one-year extensions yes yes december 3rd 2020 it expired December 3rd 2022 so the three extensions would bring this to
December 3rd of this year oh so you want extensions past tense yes yes correct excuse me oh three years okay forward no no looking for two back one forward okay past tense yes that's the idea okay so
can I ask why did you not Oh I'm sorry so go ahead present your case i was going to say why hadn't you come forward why hadn't the applicant come forward prior yeah essentially this is also not a a company an LLC or an experienced developer it's
a it's a single developer that was constructing a two family home uh wasn't familiar with the process here and um really was struggling to procure financing uh and and right now believes that he's able to complete the project uh if it's carried until December 3rd of
this year so I guess the real question is he didn't contact your office when the first thing expired correct know that he needed an extension correct i guess he just thought it was going to go on infant item right but okay so better yet
better late than never so he's here and Okay we don't have a problem with that does anyone have any questions okay okay um I would make a um a motion um here we go again i make a motion yeah
no no i make a motion to Can I I'm asking for a motion to vote on can I just give Oh I'm sorry yes yes yes sorry i haven't met in a while i kind of lose track oh yes uh staff just request um that the applicant agree to the all the
conditions associated with the original approval um but otherwise staff recommends approval okay so now I am asking for a motion to vote with conditions on um Z2025-000022
all right so I make a Okay i make a motion uh to approve Z2522 uh with with conditions i'm sorry can I get a second i second okay Eric okay
um Commissioner Baron approve commissioner Bole approve commissioner Patel I know you just arrived so would you would you like to abstain uh should be abstaining there for now okay commissioner Burns yes commissioner
Allen yes vice Chair Rule yes and Madame Chair Coyle yes okay motion carries i believe that's six in favor none opposed okay thank you good evening thank you all right thank you okay our next case is
Z20240074 it's number 10 on our agenda items it's um for 137 Arlington Avenue and the applicant is Annette Carter and I believe she's representing herself hi good evening the testimony
yes annette Carter c A R T E R 137 Arlington Avenue that's Jersey City you're welcome hi good evening all right good evening
as I said my name is Annette Carter and I'm here this evening to request approval for C variance relief to allow parking between building and the property line at 137 Arlington Avenue Jersey City
okay okay okay um yeah the reason why when I um purchased my home back in 1995 the builder and I had an agreement that he would black top my front yard
but that never happened because the builder ran out of funds he depleted all the funds and unfortunately sadly after that he passed away so I I wasn't familiar with all the rules of zoning and getting a driveway at that time and
um I was dealing with uh Amarie Obing she was the director at affordable housing division at the time she had requested that each home buyer provide a punch list with any correspondence between us and the developer
uh which um well concerning construction issues so what we did was we all got together and we provided a punch list which I have it attached to my portal and the punch list uh states that on July 29th 1996 I was submitted to
Miss Ubing via fax listing all my construction issue number 1 through 12 on line number seven of my punch list it clearly reads that the there was a makeshift walkway that would lead up to my backyard which I don't have access to my backyard unless I go up my neighbor's
driveway mhm so it was a little path so he was going to black top that so I have access to walk up and um enter my backyard but he als I also put on my punch list that the driveway has to be black topped and this is all dated from
July 29th 1996 over the years I've met with many people who I thought could lead and assist me in getting this violation issue resolved um I spoke with the council person
um I spoke with the advocate Jersey City Community Advocate i spoke with Arlington Avenue block association president and um parking authority zoning but all I got out of each meet was incorrect information i didn't know
what to do so as time went on of course off- streetet parking got limited so I took it you know unfortunately upon myself to u make access to pull into my front yard you know for safety issues cuz parking I would have to park like 3
four blocks away every day when I get off work and you know I was a little nervous about that but what I'm here today is just asking you know if you guys would approve a variance for 137 Arlington Avenue which
Oh yeah i'm nervous i'm sorry i'm sorry but yeah I am also I applied for a parking driveway parking permit which I thought was okay for me to park
in front of my house they're like "Put these in the windshield of my driveway and I would be okay." Not telling how many fights I almost got into by sticking this in my window and telling people that they can't park here but I can oh no so you know I stopped doing that i'm
like "Oh no i don't want to fight with anyone i just want to come home from work go in my home forget something at the store be able to go out and come back in but today you can't do that now it's like if you forget something at the store you can forget it you're not going to find a park you just have to double
park all night get a ticket the next day and I'm just looking for relief i've tried a many many different options i've also applied for a ZDL is that a ZDL i applied for a ZDL like I said I spoke with many people
i've been to many um on face-to-face meetings with the city of Jersey City but now I'm ready to do the right thing and I would like to apply for a C variance for my address of 137 Arlington
Avenue also good that's right also I am at this time being imposed with a $15,000 fine from the Jersey City courts if I don't get a variance from the state of New Jersey if I don't get
my C variance parking they're going to impose a $15,000 fine which why and I have until July why are they opposing imposing because of the violation okay yeah cuz I I I'm looking at your
picture you have like a cut i'm one at a time i'm sorry okay wait wait yes we can't all talk poor Iris okay sorry i'm sorry miss Carter let's start this way you've have noticed for this hearing and the notices are proper
yes so we can Okay get beyond that requirement yes so here's number two when did you black top the front yard i never black topped it she didn't black top no you didn't black top it at all no did you make a curb cut yes when did you
do that when that was around 20 years three years two three years ago yeah about 20 23 well you've been parking there for two years yes eventually now somebody's now giving you tickets yes okay yeah okay so Okay i
have a question is there anyone from uh Are you finished with your presentation right now okay all right um so um is there anyone from the public who wants to comment on this okay come forward please
good evening everybody good evening yes ma'am cheryl Armstrong dav Armstrong yes 98 Clerk Street yes what is the street name clerk CL EK Street okay uh your
comments will be limited to three minutes and um Mr allen will let you know when you have one minute left okay i live in front of her clerk Street is first and Arlington is in back of me so the things that she's mentioning about parking because I'm going through the same thing i didn't get a chance to do
my variance i didn't know it was a variance cuz inside my area I need parking also cuz we park all the way over here 3 blocks away 3 4:00 in the morning that's not good yeah and my daughter comes home she has no parking at all i'm the homeowner and I don't
have anywhere to go but there's properties that have six and seven cars and they just stack up they're allowed to block counterblock what's what when you put your car and save spaces they save spaces nobody sees that then there's people that come from other
areas from around here and park for days so when you're a homeowner I think you should be allowed to park whether it's via handicap if you have a place it should be constructed that you can park at least one car i mean we're not asking
for a portal where you have six or seven cars like a limousine service we're not asking that for at all and to verify about safety it's not safe in Jersey everybody knows that we girls and your husband can't cannot be with you every minute of the day okay so we do care
about where we live and I've been on clutch street 669 i never seen such uh inhumane and how we are we so what is that dominant we dominant and selfish yeah if you know
some like you can change sometime take turns don't save the space but take turns communicate i'm coming home at 6:00 i'm getting ready to leave or just phone or something it's just terrible how we being treated
as homeowners i own my house and I've been on the block like I said since ' 69 you know I think it's unfair and unjust so I I need somebody to show me how I'm going to get my process done too legally without getting a ticket the woman right
next to me that's right okay okay thank you um do the do any of the commissioners have any questions when you cut the curb Yes did you park across on the street to block the driveway or whatever yes sometime I
don't yes and that you're not allowed to do that no that's what I'm told see I'm not too familiar with the laws the zoning laws but they what it does well I was pulling in my front yard so Miss Carter I'm going to put it up just so
just so people can see what you're talking about thank you thank you okay so when when you purchased this house um when you purchased this home it was with the understanding that that driveway was provided and they just didn't put the top down the asphalt down for you to
pull in there okay yeah I even had to put my own concrete everything it was incomplete okay yeah okay so um so I see that you have a the curb cut and then do you open up the gate and and park there is that where you want the the the uh
parking garage oh okay all right oh in here oh okay for whatever reason it's not coming up on Oh but we have it in front of us we have it we have it we can see it that's why I'm telling you so I have one the gate was already there or was
that a gate that you put in the gate was there okay even the the swinging open like the swinging open no I kind of Okay yeah okay yes so you cut the in front of the gate yes he's a curb cutter i heard that where is that next to that
that's the blue house is that That's their driveway and that's the driveway I have to walk up to get to my back entrance there's no back doors on these homes either okay so you drive huh you drive all the way in yeah they drive all the way in they can park in the back
oh that the other house the other house yeah that's not my property okay do any other commissioners have any questions okay if not can we hear from I closed the public portion of the meeting okay and I live on the second floor
only one door front door yes yes they I even looked into that i called Trenton they're like "Well they were approved." That's what they told me oh yeah can we hear from Can we hear from staff then okay you ready for the whole boring long history
can you give us a truncated version wish this is my uh my albatross is this front yard parking so uh originally when our first zoning ordinance was adopted in the 50s um
front yard parking wasn't even really considered um around 19 actually around 1975 the city council amended under uh Mayor Coochie actually that you would be allowed to have front yard parking
and it was very limited to one and two family houses they said you could do it in the in the like the sidey yard the rear yard and the front um and they said that you had to have 20 at first and then they went down to 18 and so if you are remembering some of our other
applications we have parking dimension standards it's usually 8 1/2 wide by 18 ft long so that's the parking standard that we've really kept through the years in 2000 we changed the whole zoning ordinance and prohibited front yard
parking so how that looks on the other side because I'm sure you're saying there's front yard parking everywhere in Jersey City so the zoning officer is allowed to basically grandfather something and the way that you grandfather something the MLUL leaves it a really clear kind of path you have to
prove that it was legally existing at the time that it was legally allowed right so I got permits to do it when it was legally allowed in a place like Jersey City sometimes that's very difficult um so you can take a I I can say at this point I take somewhat of a
liberal um view on it and I say if you can prove to me that prior to um at least 2000 when I know for certain that the law was changed uh to not allow front yard parking that you had it we can talk about grandfathering now that
doesn't take into consideration that uh the this is I know it sounds like a lot but it is important the zoning officer prior to me was saying "As long as I could go on Google Street View and see that you had a parking space in 2007 I
was grandfathering it." And there's two things that are happening one is the front yard parking and two is the curb cut and those are two separate things because you're allowed to get a permit to front park in front of your curb cut so sometimes Nick would go out and he
would say that curb cut has been there since 2007 which is as far back as Google Street View goes which is why 2007 was picked and he'd say that that curb cut was there since 2007 so I'm going to give you this driveway parking
permit which is probably what happened here in this instance because you can see if you were driving by as the inspector you'd say "Oh that looks like a shared parking easement situation." And maybe sign off on it so at some point Miss Carter did have on the books
a legal park in front of your driveway um permit um but he was not taking into consideration that most likely if you had a curb cut you were parking so one doesn't really exist without the other
and so a lot of times that kind of leniency allowed for front yard parking that wasn't existing before 2000 and by doing that I think the numbers were kind of crazy we let in like another couple thousand parking spaces that would maybe
not have met the legal standard for grandfathering so we're in the like the postapocalypse of dealing with how do we deal with these illegal parking spaces so my view on this as a zoning officer has been show me that you've had the
space since 2000 and I won't even take into consideration that you don't have 18 ft which means that you wouldn't have gotten it in the first place right where I draw the line is that your car is going to go into the sidewalk because one that's illegal in the zoning code
and two that's illegal as far as uh the police are concerned even and you need a franchise for that so those are the lines that I'll draw um in this instance Miss Carter is the first and I have been doing this for 18 years where I'm recommending that you consider approval
and I'll say that why we talked about this I know at the last meeting and those words are unique and specific and I think that there is a history here this building was taken down and rebuilt by the JC as a part of a program and even though when the planning board
approved it they said no front yard parking the rest of the houses that were built under this have front yard parking so you're talking about all the other this is this is just one so this was like a scattered sites prop um program
um and in this instance Miss Carter has 23 feet in front she didn't take up any landscaping to do it she just uh paved down two kind of just driving strips so I'm going to kind of show you what where I'm talking about with the differences so you can see that Miss Carter has a
lot 23 feet and she's just on the two lines that's going to be different from the fact so there's our I did this 24 properties entirely on this block six of them have garages which means they have legal curb cuts and three of them have
shared uh easements driveways so that those are legal curb cuts and four of them I've given violations to besides Miss uh Carter here these houses here even though they have legal curb cuts and you guys can't see it i'm looking just for the reference
I'm looking at uh 149 to 153 Arlington um even though they have garages they do not have enough room for front yard parking so if they got a violation for front yard parking it's because their car was hanging out on the sidewalk um
what like the red car like the red car like the like like the red one right there actually yeah um and then in some instances a lot of those are actually obvious so here's a violation that was given you can kind of see it's a neighbor right here they took the
landscaping out that was over here and replaced it with a car port and that is a 100% clear violation and these are the things that we see pretty consistently so something like um I'm not 100% sure which addresses i think
this maybe 124 um no that wouldn't make any sense because you're on the odd side uh whatever this one is you can kind of see i know for the record it should be a little bit more clear and I apologize um that even though in this instance
there may be 18 ft and I'm not sure if there is because I have not done the member measurements for it um it is not the same scenario as Miss Carter's where Miss Carter does have the the building with the 23 feet where there is a legal
history here of um a a a contract and a whatever with JCA anyrie Hubings was a person who did JT she eventually became the HDC director i don't know if you remember um and again a lot of these other houses do have the frontier
parking so I mean there's there's a lot of things for you to consider but I want to be really careful that we don't create a precedent it really does make a difference and makes my life very difficult because we shouldn't be granting these things by variances we should really just be thinking about new policy um if that's what we're going to
do but I will say that if you do consider and you guys want to talk amongst yourselves about it um if you're going to recommend it that only uh I ask for a street tree um and that's that that's the the the nuts and bolt of my
um put that drive she could she could put the Well we'll figure it out or we won't but we'll we'll we'll put it in Union City what if What if we work on it together i
have I have one more question Tanya so she has to redo the whole curb and sidewalk correct or or that curb cut i don't Did you remove the curb cut no no the curb cut's still there and the curb cut is 10 feet so I wouldn't there okay
the curb cut is 10 feet already all right okay do you have a question Peter no i thought Peter yeah i mean we're talking about the tree if you were to put the driveway adjacent to the sidewalk then there would be room on the right hand side as we're looking at this
photograph to put a tree on the right hand side so basically the driveway would would butt up against to the sidewalk that means that you have space to the right and you would would have to you would have to do something actually you wouldn't have to do anything with the gate because the gate already opens up far enough but there would be room in
the front for a tree on the right hand side on the right side that's why right right now your driveway is centered on that on that green space pretty much but if you buted it up against the sidewalk then there is enough right room on the right hand side
for a tree yeah you can put those little and um Miss Marion will be working with you on that she'll be Miss Marion will be working with you on that I'm sure okay so with any other additional comments or Okay so I am asking for a
motion um to vote on um case number Z2024-000074 madam Chair I'd like to make a motion to approve KZ2024-07 4 as a as presented to the board this evening with conditions with conditions okay can I get a second
second okay commissioner Patel i commissioner Allen yes commissioner Bole yes commissioner Burns yes commissioner Baron vice Chair Rule yes madame Chair Coyle
yes motion carries to approve this application uh seven in favor none opposed okay good thank you everyone get that property paved okay thank you get it paved and good luck okay i don't
know yes yes sorry i want to hear her case now somebody's doing okay moving forward our next case will be uh case Z2025-70013 it's for 80 Broadway it's on
our agenda um as carried forward from March 6th good evening Madam Chair good evening commissioners gerard Pizzillo from Genova Burns on behalf of the applicant Avenue West Square LLP mhm uh appearing
uh this is for a site plan amendment uh we did carry from the last meeting uh I did provide another notice of our application uh for our appearance this evening i did upload it to the portal so I would ask if I may approach the deis and present to council for his review
i've looked at it on the portal to comply so I appreciate the time commissioners oh sorry sorry sorry my bad so thank you commissioners um before you this evening is a very a very minor amendment to a project that this board
previously approved under case Z19008 uh at that time the board approved preliminary and final major site plan for a mixed juice project consisting of a v uh one building of various stories five to 12 stories uh
with 477 dwelling units uh about 9,000 ft of retail space uh and a number of parking spaces the project the application before you doesn't change any of that rather they're minor refinements to the building that's under
construction right now the majority of the changes that we're presenting you this evening are all interior uh related to the ground floor some mechanical revisions and tenant programming the only other change that we're requesting
this evening is for signage bands along the exterior uh denoting the retail spaces uh they are all compliant this is a R3 zone so the way the R3 zone works is uh signages are permitted for every
1,000 square feet of retail uh so ultimately the there will be 11,000 ft of retail so there's 11 signs proposed uh these are just the signage bands uh so any applicant or any tenant who uh
wants to change their sign or do something different would have to come to this board or consult with city planning to uh to make that happen uh and that whether that requires an approval you know is subject to that you know to that determination at the time
uh those are the changes that we're requesting this evening i have one witness Bruce Stevie our architect of record who will run you through them i will note none of these changes uh exacerbate worsen any of the previously approved variances do not create any new
variances uh and the presentation should be rather quick so unless the board has any questions for me I'll turn it over to Bruce and he can run you through they'll hold out questions till the end sure thank you Chair what did he say okay i do
bruce Stevie s T I E V E not him okay uh my name is Bruce Stevie i'm a principal in the firm of March Higgins Stevie Architecture um we're located in Hoboken New Jersey i'm a licensed
architect to the state of New Jersey since 1996 my license is a good standing i've appeared before this board before we accept your expertise thank you so much um let's see if I can get this to work so um tonight we're here
uh sorry we're here tonight uh again to discuss the amendments to the site plan for uh the the uh uh Westside project um this project has received a few amendments over the years um uh back in uh 2019 it received some
amendments and again in 2022 um the project is previously an industrial site uh that's being rehabilitated into a residential project uh construction started on the project in 2023 um the project is going to occupy the entire
block and see if I can do my pointer here in the center of the site um it'll be a pro and the site is approximately 86,000 square feet as uh was mentioned the project's currently under construction um works advance work is advancing
quickly um this is a more recent photograph um and I believe it's even further along since uh because we were going to present at the beginning of the month um uh this amendment is uh addresses a series of interior adjustments to the
project uh one was a a slight increase in the retail square footage the second was a reconfiguration uh and development of the ground floor uh including amenity uses um then as was mentioned mechanical equipment locations have shifted slightly on the roof of the building and
as was mentioned building signage so um the first uh adjustment was uh as the parking was laid out in the basement um a few areas that were underutilized are now being used as storage and mechanical areas those are
highlighted in red uh outlines on the build on the drawings that you see uh no parking uh was lost and the spaces are located in the corners of the garage they're inefficient for parking uh second is the ground floor plan uh
this shows a uh the uh adjustment of the retail square footage so um in the 2022 amendment the retail was reduced slightly um that was basically after COVID um the market for retail was slowing down so at that time the
developer developer looked to to reduce the amount of retail obviously that's bounced back and and retail is robust again um so we're going back to uh the square footage of 11,815 square ft of retail space um this
is slightly smaller than the original approval um but it's that's the new square footage for retail um in addition building amenities have been developed including um co-working areas a revised fitness area uh guest suites and a cafe
space that has been added to the lobby um next I have a a rendering of the interior of the building so again as I mentioned this project's been developing uh continuing to develop and so this is just a this gives you a flavor of what
uh the interior lobbies are going to be like and the amenity packages for the building um this next view shows the interior of the lobby looking back towards um a a a grab-and-go area in in the building um and the interiors of the
building have been designed to reflect the character of the architecture of the outside of the building uh the next changes that we're uh the revisions that we're uh proposing are uh interior courtyard revisions so again
since the project's been uh advancing um they've engaged a landscape architect and the landscape architect has done wonderful work on the courtyard space for the building um these are a few renderings of what that courtyard space will be um there's a uh outdoor lounge
areas and dining areas there are gathering areas uh for movie nights in the courtyard space and then the pool area itself um then uh again uh you'll notice on on the the roof plans the areas in
red are where the mechanical equipment is shifted again the equipment is all centralized on the roof and it's all screened with architectural uh screening so it's not visible from the street or surrounding properties and then again on the upper
floor of the building the top floor of the building the mechanical equipment is shifted around but again all of the mechanical ised by um uh decorative architectural uh screening systems um the last thing is uh was mentioned is
that uh retail signage has been updated to reflect the uh the potential tenants um each sign will be in compliant with the LDO um and as was mentioned uh each sign if they if they look to change the
sign or or do different signage they would have to come back or speak with the zoning to get approvals for that um we've also added a few entry canopies um at some of the entrances to the building just to provide a little bit of
shelter uh they they are again compliant um and uh are located in areas that have the red outlines on them uh and that really is uh there there was a one retail sign that was
added to the back side of the building to highlight the fitness center um and that's shown again in red and then these are just blowup details that show where those signs are located and and the canopies
themselves um we're really excited uh to have to bring this building into this neighborhood we think it's going to be a great addition um and we hope that um that you can u look at these uh amended plans favorably is there anyone from the community that
wants to make any comments okay and I'll close the public portion commissioners do you have any comments or questions yes i have one question do you have a rendering with the um AC units on on um
or was the first one the original one that I guess that's the question I should have asked is the first one that you showed the original or that's the proposed that's the proposed again and okay the units themselves are um in in approximately the same location they've just been now they're per they're we
know exactly where they're going to go so they're placed there and they're screened by architectural louvers yeah all right thank you um I don't know is that where is So where is this building located again is it near the
Puchini area cross across it's the parking lot yes okay across from where Puchinis was okay as long as the salaria is not touched no um as long as it's not yeah it is um so I just have one question you haven't
started any of this work yet you're waiting for our approvals that's correct okay this is none of this is constructed we're waiting to get the approvals okay yes the the the the building is under construction but the interior finishes haven't been started um Okay yeah
mechanical equipment isn't located yet okay does anyone have any other questions okay um since we have no other questions I'm asking for a motion i'm sorry staff um staff recommends approval as long as the
conditions from the prior resolutions carry over we confirm that and my clients would have no issue app uh adhering to those conditions all right i am now asking for a motion to vote on case Z2025-000013 madam Chair I'd like to make a motion to
approve Z2025-000013 as presented to the board this evening with conditions can I get a second second okay commissioner Patel hi commissioner Allen yes commissioner Bole yes commissioner Burns yes commissioner
Baron yes vice Chair Rule yes madame Chair Coyle yes motion carries seven in favor none opposed thank you thank you very much commissioners have a nice You're welcome okay iris do you need a break yet or you're okay
okay all right our next case is um 16 Dwight Street yep case Z20240066 yeah not good space ah should I ask so do you feel like you just keep coming back here over and over
missing those hundred people huh okay king Fast Friends 2024 i don't remember this well Mr harrington you did upload your uh your uh notices yes they remarked at the last
meeting i believe this got carried over from the February February meeting okay great yes for the record Charles Harrington of Connell Foley on behalf of the applicant uh this uh this project was before the board at the February meeting and it got carried carried over
to uh tonight uh as you recall there's there's a specific issue um with regard to the stairs uh and uh the application before the board in February had the stairs protruding over the property line
and we're asking for a franchise ordinance and and the the discussion was let's find a solution um to to make uh put those stairs within the property line uh so our client did go back and they sharpened their pencil and they did
find a solution which we we think works it it is uh the uh stairs are now within the property line uh we would still need a variance for uh 12 1/2 in um over the
4ft encroachment um so in doing so um what they've done is the steps have been reduced from 18 to 17 uh the depth of the treads went from 11 in to 10 and a half inches and the height of the risers
uh were changed from 7 and 38 uh to 7 and 3/4 um that all resulted in the change of the stairs so that we can fit within the property line um so that that being said it's you know that's the solution that that we're proposing and
my client is is on his way here he's just not here yet um but in the spirit of full disclosure what what my client did is he he removed the stairs that were not acceptable um and then he kind of got ahead of himself a little
overzealous and he has installed the stairs um that are being proposed as part of this application he understands though that those were installed can I just interrupt you one minute to for clarification purposes yes the last time we were here he had already done the
work we asked him about that he went moved ahead we told we asked him to bring the plants to us first for approval before he did any work he did the work already again mr harrington what do we what do you expect us to do here well I I understand that's that's where I was going he's I've had that
conversation with him uh and said the stairs that he installed are subject to the approval of this board and they're at his own risk so if the we we think that's an appropriate solution but if the board says they don't think it's the right solution you know for the placement of the stairs and the and the
I think I think the problem we have here is that he did it again without us approving it and he still needs a 12 1/2 in whatever you know i mean I I understand i'm I'm not you know I didn't I didn't know he he put them in beforehand either so but so there's a
whole presentation that we're supposed to listen to knowing that he didn't follow the proper um procedures again well in this Yes in this Yes in this instance yes so the bottom line is he's put the cart before the horse and now the question becomes what do we do twice
well why what should we do and by the way if we say for argument sake uh you know what take take the stairs away which is you said you advised him of that risk what does he do then well what is his
hurry is he trying to get a co on this building move like this i I can't speak for for him but he is he is coming i think he was trying to to expedite the process but it is is absolutely the the stairs um they're not approved so if
they're not approved tonight uh then you know whatever the the solution is he he'd have to he'd have to abide by that this this board as to what what you think is right this is a We do have another case right we have another case on the agenda so should we wait for this
gentleman is he We can Yeah I see that Mr lean's here so he will uh he can move forward with that case why don't we listen to that case first and then we'll wait to see if we give you a client a call and imagine everybody has a question for him oh absolutely you know a
question it's not like airplanes where they're going to ask him and everybody is around that might that might be easier i think people want to talk to them that might be the easiest okay so then we will go ahead with uh
case Z2024-000069 26 Beacon Avenue 26 Beacon uh good evening commissioners uh Tom Le from Conno Foley here on behalf of the applicant how are you um this is a notice case so I will provide Mr le Paglia with my original affidavit which
has also been posted on Tyler uploaded right yeah we'll give it to Iris and still mark it as N1 and we we have uh looked at it and and uh your notices comply so thank you council in evidence
and that's one um the property before you tonight is uh on Beacon Avenue it is a undersized lot um it is currently six units uh but it is in very very bad repair uh so my
client is coming in here to try and make it an actual usable building they're bringing it down from six units to three units which still does need a density variance which is why we're in front of the board here two units is what is permitted on this site um they are going to add an extension to the back of the
building uh to try and make uh three nice three-bedroom usable units um we do think it's in line with the density that is on this block we do think it is in line with the building next door to it which is also on a similar lot which is
also three units and we think it'll take some blight off of the block and we think it's uh a good use for a building that's in severe disrepair right now so uh I have uh two witnesses this evening um I have Mr moreno uh who's going to be our
architect and then I have Miss Worcell who's going to come up and uh talk to the varants okay great i'll qualify don't worry yes okay so um Mr moreno is not a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey he's the project manager but he
did prepare the plans uh Mr lewis has uh reviewed them and he is a licensed architect so he will be here if there's any questions that the board needs asked that a licensed architect can prepare but Mr moreno is going to be our uh he's going to present okay today yes all
right hi do you swear that the testimony will be the truth yes I do jeffrey Lewis Lis thank you so Mr lewis has been before the board many times and I reared
because he has a tendency to speed talk i've been practicing um but my license is in good standing and just for the record I actually did a project on this property seven years ago that went nowhere so I'm very familiar with the project with property
oh another plugin yes good evening oh that's what he wants to do huh i do martin R this is what it looks like he's changing it okay uh very much like
Mr lewis I also have a tendency to speak fast so please slow me down if I get a little out of control um okay are we okay to move forward i'll speak into the mic so Oh yes of course my apologies
is this better yes okay um as mentioned my name is Martin Moreno here to speak on our project on behalf of T leaport Architect PC at 26 Beacon Avenue as Mr stated uh just recently the building is currently a three-story six-unit
building but it is severely dilap uh dilapidated i dilapidated dilapidated i'm sorry english is not my first language so I apologize um so we are taking it upon ourselves to renovate both the interior and the exterior of the building to make it a little bit
more attractive and to make it more um in line with the existing streetscape so as previously mentioned there is there has been some construction that has undergone on Beacon Avenue uh more specifically right next to our building um to start off on our cover page the
exterior proposed rendering that you see here uh the building on the left is a building that is currently being under construction um it is very similar to the project that that we are proposing it was previously um it is being renovated and an addition is being proposed as a new three-story three-unit
building um our building is a little bit shorter uh we are not really messing with the ceiling heights uh the existing ceiling heights something that I will get into as we progress along with the presentation but just to start off just give you a quick idea of what we're doing here with our um proposed exterior
rendering so we're doing a very sort of simple basic design something that is found um across Jersey City this sort of box-like structure with a bumpout um with a sort of brownish grayish brick and a green uh siding on the bumpout now
the image isn't really reading very well it's reading a little bit darker it's reading as a sort of black color but I assure you that it's not meant to be a sort of dark or black paneling it's more to be a sort of green accent and the reason for that was because we did find green accents in similar buildings um
both across the street and next to us and that's something that I will get to once we get to the uh residential design standards so moving on to our um surveys our proposed existing and proposed site plans the existing site plans here on
the top lefthand corner as mentioned it is an existing three-story uh building and we are proposing an as of right bulk requirement um from a bulk requirement standpoint we are proposing an as of right addition both the rear edition um both the rear setbacks the sideyard
setbacks and the height are all compliant the reason we are here today as Mr le had mentioned earlier was that we are seeking um a density variance because we are technically expanding an existing non-conforming um so again the existing site plan here and our proposed
site plan with the uh compliant rear yard edition we also have some um existing street photos that we took now this project has been in development for a little while now roughly two years so these pictures are a little outdated i apologize um I believe our planner will
have some more updated photos but we did we took some uh street photos uh looking in both directions towards Palisad Avenue towards Palisad Avenue and towards Ballwin Avenue moving on we just have some very simple standards that I'm sure you guys have
seen a million times so on to the existing floor plans um as mentioned before this this is an existing six-unit building the units themselves um were a little tough to make out because the interior of the building is very is is
severely out of shape it's pretty much down to the stud framing and the stud framing themselves aren't in really in the best conditions um but from what we were able to take away was that we have uh a unit on each floor situated towards the front of the building and towards
the back um but as you can tell given that the existing footprint is 20 by uh 40 roughly these are very small units um we have some existing site photos that um oriented towards the bottom of the building uh specifically the fire escape
which is something that I'm going to highlight a little bit more but just to uh just before we move on to the proposed floor plans just highlighting the fact there's a six units total two on each floor with each unit being very very small uh not
really I mean depending on where you are I'm sure in Japan this is a massive unit but for here it's probably not ideal u moving on to the proposed floor plans cut this so the plan here is essentially to um gut essentially the entire the
entirety of the interior of the building and propose three-bedroom two- bath units on each floor so just to go over the first floor the main entrance is located here uh we will enter through the main common entrance uh straight to the left you will have your entry to
unit one you will have a kitchen living dining area and three comfortable bedrooms with the master oriented towards the back of the building uh with a on suite and a common bath for bedroom one and bedroom two also something that we are proposing for each unit is a
washerdryer system and um central air and heating just to make it a little bit more accommodating and just bring it up to standards to pretty much just the the normal today's age of uh Jersey City apartments um going on to the second floor you make
your way up the stairs uh from there we initially have a single run that single one will then turn into a sort of scissor stair uh so once you get to the top uh and you make your first turn you will then be able to go straight into unit two unit two again same idea three
bedrooms um with the master oriented towards the back on suite uh and then a common bath for bedroom one and bedroom two um in this case uh unit two will have an exterior balcony that will that will serve as the unit's exterior space
so I got a little ahead of myself i forgot to mention that each unit will have an exterior amenity space with unit one having direct access to the backyard and unit two having a balcony moving on to the third floor unit um you continue
up the scissor stair and then you go all the way to the top and from there you'll have direct access to unit 3 um similar three bedrooms two bathrooms uh stack washer dryer system uh water heating
central air and also um a balcony towards the back of the building accessible from the master bedroom but also a roof terrace that will be accessible only to unit 3 so as you make your way into the building and you make towards the left
will be the living dining area and there will also be a turn where you can go straight up into the roof terrace but as mentioned this roof terrace will only be accessible to unit 3 it will not be a common roof deck um I just want I just want to specify that because as the
board may know that could create some egress issues so we want to keep it specifically um applicable to unit 3 no you can so just to recap on the sizes of the units uh unit one will be a
1,74 1,074 ft unit unit 2 will be 1,092 ft unit and unit 3 will be 1,178 square ft uh this is a significant improvement from the buildings from the units that are there because as mentioned each unit right now existing
is currently about 250 square feet um highlighting once again the egress issue the fire escape we are we are choosing to keep the fire escape for um egress purposes now with the current
code if we were to update the existing building to the current code we technically technically do not need the fire escape because we are a three-story building and we are proposing a sprinkler system so that's something else that we're proposing we're actually improving the fire security and protection of the building um but given
that we have a sprinkler system we can get away with just one means of egress but we're designed to keep the fire escape just as a sort of extra precaution for um dual means of egress but as mentioned it's not
required uh going on to the existing elevations here we have existing front existing rear um existing side once again showcasing the firescape and the other existing side which is attached to um to the building which is attached to
one of the to a neighboring building um we are keeping the ceiling the floor to ceiling heights the same uh but we are removing uh we have labeled here that this sort of pitch roof is going to be removed to make space for a new flat roof to accommodate the uh proposed roof
terrace for unit 3 showing the proposed uh streetscape the proposed elevations um highlighting once again the residential design standards as you can see at the bottom there are these photos were once again to reiterate these photos were taken a little while back
about a year and a half ago the the street has significantly significantly changed since then um but even at that point when the project was started there was already some some newer buildings on the street a lot of buildings that had similar accents to what we were proposing in regards to the front
bumpouts the paneling the casement windows picture windows um etc um if you can see here you'll see that one of the immediate neighboring buildings does have a green accent along the uh the the the side of the wall and then some of
the other buildings which is a little tough to read here had a lot of green accents around the windows and doors those green accents as previously mentioned were the reasoning for proposing the green paneling on the bumpout so the green paneling again this is sort
of like a dark forest green wood that we are proposing um we are proposing as I said a sort of grayish uh brownish brick which I brought a sample of I'll
just I'll just like put it right there okay um which is sort of which is sort of like a blend so it's not just one flush color but it's a blend and has a little bit of texture just to give it some more um just to give the building a little bit more character and just a building u a
building section to highlight the uh the existing floor ceiling heights which as mentioned we are keeping but obviously we're going to be reutilizing and redoing the building to uh to better accommodate the existing heights and with that being said that pretty much concludes my presentation okay thank you
Mr mareno I only have one question for you uh I'm not asking you this as a planner i'm asking you as an architect when you designed this building the intent was for it to comply with the bulk standards of the R1 correct correct that's correct that's all I have thank you thank you we'll hold any questions
till we're finished okay uh with that uh my planner u Miss Worstelle is going to come up and just walk through the deviation which again is just about density okay thank you thank you uh Martin one the one time I actually have a pre
you know something to show I do okay carolyn Worstelle w O R S T E L L and m Miss Worstelle you've testified before this board many times correct i have and your license is in good standing it is yes um good evening everyone so I'm I uh am
here we are here uh because we have a single variance a Dvariance for the density um as was mentioned um even though we are decreasing the density of the property it still exceeds what is permitted um under the ordinance um I wanted to sort of start off today
um just to to again or or re reorient you to the site um and provide an updated photo i was at the site myself on Tuesday evening so this is as of Tuesday um just to give you an idea of what the current condition of the site is and of the status of the the
buildings on either side of it which are under construction or recently completed um so uh we are requesting a density variance we're proposing three units with a density of 57 units per acre where 42 is what is permitted in the uh
R1 district um the uh project itself is going to be reducing what is an existing nonconformity for this lot um it is a six-unit building uh which has a density of 114 units per acre um so by uh with
this project we are actually reducing the density of this property and bringing it into greater conformance with the ordinance um the property itself is we I believe is very able to accommodate the units that are being proposed um you know the way that the building has been laid out with the
three units um you do get three well-sized bedroom uh three-bedroom units that average over a thousand square feet so that's a really comfortable size that you can create within a completely conforming bulk uh for this property um and we're actually even
reducing one of the existing non-conformities of the structure which is its height because of its peak roof it actually has a height that exceeds the 35 ft permitted in the ordinance and so with the changes being proposed here um with removal of the peaked roof and
creating of a flat roof um we actually are going to be bringing the overall the building height into conformity with the ordinance um the density itself is actually uh I think very consistent with the character of this block um and I
should have asked the the first photo should probably be marked into evidence um as a as an exhibit yeah yeah can we enter it that is A2 a2 why not yes okay and then um this density exhibit I guess would be A3 a A3
yes um so uh the subject property as you can see is sort of in the center of the the um exhibit it's highlighted in yellow um it's lot number 28 uh we are
um this block itself of the uh let's see 18 lots that front on the north side of Beacon Avenue uh 10 have densities which exceed the maximum permitted in the R1 district uh in addition both of the lots that are adjacent to the property to
both the right and the left of us as well as to the rear of us all have densities that exceed what is permitted in the R1 um the lot that is to I guess in the in the exhibit to the left of us which is uh would be west uh uh I
believe that's um 32 Beacon that has three units which is uh a very similar actually actually it's I think it's a high slightly higher density because it's a slightly smaller lot um and then the lot to the east of US 24 Beacon um
is actually an 8-unit building which has 100 which would be 128 uh units per acre um so as you can see there is significant um number of properties along this block which exceed uh the density that's permitted in the R1 so
we're really very consistent with the character of this block um in addition the block itself is sandwiched by districts on either side which also permit much higher densities um to the east of us along Palisades Avenue you have the M district which
doesn't have any maximum density which would be permitted for the a couple of residential uses that are there the RC2 district um has a density of 75 units per acre and then on Baldwin Avenue which is on the uh west side of the
block it's 80 units per acre so you know there's significant density that's permitted on this block front uh both because of the the the um uh the the districts that they're in but also within the part portion of the block that's in the R1 we are seeing
much higher densities um you know I think overall this project is consistent with the municipal land use law um it would encourage um an appropriate use and development of this this property uh that will promote the public health and safety um right now
this building is condemned um so with this project we're taking up a building that is unsafe um and we're going to be bringing it up to code uh we're going to be creating a very active and attractive use um so I think that's really consistent with purpose A the municipal
land use law um it's consistent with purpose B to secure from safety uh from fire flood and panic and other disasters again it's a condemned building with this we're going to be fully renovating this structure and it's going to meet
all you know current building and fire safety codes so really a much safer condition for not only this this lot but also for the lot surrounding it uh it's consistent with purpose C adequate light air and open space this
project conforms with all of the bulk standards in the R1 district we're not asking for any bulk standards either setbacks height uh you know coverages everything is conforming um I think it promotes a an appropriate population density um as I
mentioned you know it's very consistent with the character of this block um and I think it's also consistent with purpose I creating a desirable visual environment um obviously a a building that's been fully renovated and has an attractive facade is much better than
what is there today which is a condemned structure um I don't see uh any substantial detriment to the public good in fact I see a really a great benefit again uh create taking a condemned property and creating a new functional residential structure
meeting modern code um that is consistent with all the bulk requirements you're going to be getting new sidewalks a new street tree and landscaping along the street frontage that will very that will visually improve the streetscape um and I don't see a substantial impairment to the
intent or purpose of the zone plan it's really consistent with uh the intent of uh the district R1 district to encourage incompatible compatible infill and that's really what this is it's a very compatible infill development um on this
site and I also uh believe it's consistent with the lower height small area vision plan uh this this uh this block is within that that um uh small area vision plan uh which talked about beautifying streets and adding new street trees and front yard landscaping
which is will be happening um limiting development to three stories uh as this one will be uh inconsistent with all the R1 bulk standards um and rehabilitating existing structures so this is is rehabilitating an existing structure with an addition um and really sort of
extending the lifespan of a structure and and all the embodied carbon and all of the um you know materials that that will be uh able to be uh salvaged here so I think overall uh that the uh variances are justified um that we can
meet the criteria uh for the the the density variance um and that both positive and ne negative criteria are met thank you okay um does that conclude your presentation that does um uh again I'd
just like to uh state that I know this board is not worried about blight and redevelopment but at the end of the day this is removing what is essentially a blighted property and replacing it with uh something that matches with the neighborhood a density that matches with it and a use that matches with it so I thank the board for their time thank you
okay thank you okay is there anyone from the public to make any comments okay I'll close the public portion of the meeting uh commissioners do you have any questions or comments that you would like to make no okay um I'd like to hear
from staff uh sure um in staff's review of the project they found that the bulk and mass of the building is consistent with that of the neighborhood um and uh the design as well is consistent with the number of the buildings in the neighborhood um and looking at the density variance it does um kind of
lessen the non-conformity by slicing the density of the building in half and it is consistent with a number of the buildings uh the residential buildings in the block which some of them have three units within them so um I would just like to confirm one thing with the
applicants team is um I staff recommended five conditions uh and or memo project is I have reviewed staff's memo we are okay with the conditions within and we will agree to them in the resolution okay uh with that said uh staff recommends approval
okay okay now do the commissioners have any questions or comments okay mr beasley can you please take Yes uh I'm sorry i'm sorry wait whoa whoa whoa whoa i'm just running ahead here okay so I am asking for a motion um to
um a motion uh to vote on Z2024-000069 can I get a motion madam Chair I'd like to make a motion to approve case Z2024-0069 as presented to the board this evening with conditions okay can I
Okay second commissioner Patel yes commissioner Allen yes commissioner Bole yes commissioner Burns yes commissioner Baron yes vice Chair Rule yes madame Chair Coyle yes motion
carries seven in favor none opposed thank you good luck okay Iris do you want to take a little break right now before we start our final case okay okay so we will take a break um it
is 7:16 so we'll come back at like like say 7:25 okay it's 9 minutes we'll be presenting case Z2024-0066 16 Dwight Street mr
harrington okay yes thank you uh I'm back on the record so um yeah my my client my clients are here um so um I'll defer to the board if
you'd like us to go through the presentation or hear from them first if you have questions before we start but before we go there I just like to you know back up and like the question was how you know what do we do and I I actually have had you know a similar situation before the planning board
where you know people go out and they you know things have been uh done before they get to the board and you know the direction or or at that time and I I I'd submit to this board is you you look at the at at this as if it was not there do
you think it's appropriate um you know would you approve it because if you don't approve it they're going to rip it out they have to there's there's no they don't have any there's no vesting rights to this just because it's there and you'll hear from them that when they took the stairs out they they started to
to kind of put it together to see what it would look like and then there's like well let's they just kept going and said now we will see you know in real life what it looks like this board I think when you see it all things equal I think
it makes sense um but Mr harrington there is a proper procedure to follow and the first time this gentleman you came before us with the case okay we did approve one of them and you know we went then we did not approve the second one and he cannot come back
completed i don't know what the other commissioners think ignorance again when we were perfectly clear as to what he had to do had to follow what is outlined in the guidelines for coming before this board and when to submit plans he was it was specifically told that he had to
bring the plans to us first and not proceed with any work and now again he has just gone against what the what what he's supposed to be doing and now you're asking us that we should look at this and say it's okay i I am asking you to look at it because if you don't think it's okay he has to
rip it out yes but he should have brought the plans here first understood okay okay but I guess the the con converse I guess question to that is if um but that's his that's the situation he created we didn't create the situation he did we totally understand
that and I've you know had that discussion with them um but it's you know if it's appropriate I'd say if if you look at it and you think it's appropriate then then then you you leave it there and you move forward if you don't think it's
appropriate that's that's what the board's here to decide you you could say "I still don't like it." I I don't know if we're supposed to vote on what's appropriate i think we're supposed to vote on giving them the approval to do this when they've already gone ahead with it so approval and and saying it's
okay it's appropriate approval and appropriate are two different things well what I mean by appropriate is is is the variance justified that we still have to prove that the the variance is justified or or satisfy you if you if you're not satisfied that we've met the criteria then you're not going to
approve it okay okay okay all right so let's listen to this okay so uh with that said would you we can make the presentation first or if you uh and then and then uh my thought is to have the presentation first and then my clients
are here to to uh have any questions unless madam chairwoman if you if you'd like to ask them questions first before we go in into it okay i think we follow the way it's supposed to be presented here so please Mr harrington let's follow the proper procedure thank you
hi yes okay um and let me just say I wasn't the person who presented at the last meeting however I did read through the transcript and I understand where we are which was really not very far so let's
just jump right back in and you ended last meeting talking about the staircase so uh here I'm looking at what was uh previously built at the top and then what we were going to be proposing tonight but what since has been built at
the bottom uh so above we see that the stair was protruding 3 ft out into the public right of way at the bottom you see that we have been able to reduce that stair uh so we're actually completely on our property we have a 2-in uh front yard
setback from from the our front property line to the stair um as was mentioned we did this by um increasing the riser height from 7 and 38 to 7 and 3/4 in that allowed us to remove one stair uh we reduced the size of the treads from
11 in to 10 1/2 in and then lastly at the landing at the top of the uh flight of stairs it was reduced from 5'6 to 4 foot which was what was originally approved um we decided on these uh tread heights
and tread um and riser excuse me riser heights and tread widths um because we thought that was a good combination of keeping the stair on our property as well as uh not making the stair too small so that it's um unsafe or uncomfortable the building code allows
you to go up to 8 and a/4 in but you don't see it very often it's usually kind of a basement stair in the basement you see your stairs are usually a little taller and it actually allows you to go down to a 9 in tread which is very small um and again you see it in basements it's it's not something you see very
often especially in a multif family use where this is a shared stair we weren't really comfortable going that small so we felt this was a good balance and that this brought the stair onto our property and out of the public right of way which was one of the main goals here u we do have a photograph that was taken i think
we need to mark it into the record i can bring it up here do you have the the date and everything just the notices i believe this is A2 take anotherch okay so this photo was taken uh by the
client in March 4th this was taken after the construction that was not supposed to happen so this is the stair that is completely on our property line uh so I think what you can see is that we have the stair back here you could see that our neighbor's stair is much further in
front than ours is their stair is over the property line and you could see that their fence is probably 5 to six feet over the property line into the public right away um and this is actually uh very common on this street really the whole street frontage if you if you were walking down the street you would think
the property lines were at this fence because most of the properties are building out to that line this is pretty common in Jersey City in these older neighborhoods um the other thing I did want to mention here is we're proposing to increase the
uh size of the the uh landscaping area so you can see that we extended these pits again our property ends right at the end of the stair here we're extending the uh the planting areas along the fence and here out to basically that extended line of the street
frontage and we could see that if I go back to the plans you could see those areas at the top and at the bottom of the drawing so we're going to propose some shrubs in those areas uh additionally um let me zoom out
quickly this was the original proposed you could see in the backyard it was originally proposed as yard with a small patio what was built was a much larger patio and since then that patio has been removed so we've gone back to the same depth as the original patio however we
actually did add one additional shrub underneath the air conditioning unit to act as screening there so we actually increased the landscaping of a very very small amount but we went back to what was what was originally approved and then went a little beyond this is the second floor the only
thing you can really see here is that this landing was previously 5'6 and you could you could tell right here that it is much smaller it's now 4 foot in total and that's the that was the third way that we were able to bring the stair back and get it onto our property this is the second floor this
is the third floor excuse me there are no changes to this floor the square footage is exactly the same as what was approved and this is the roof plan which was built as was approved here we're moving on to the front elevations on the left you can see what was approved i'm going to zoom in a
little bit and the right drawings are are showing existing we could focus on this one so you can see both of these buildings were modern finishes uh the bulk uh the the bays and and the bulk of the building have remained unchanged
from what was approved however the finishes have been changed uh starting at the bottom the brick was changed from a light gray brick to a darker gray brick uh we had this um light gray fiber cement siding above and that was changed to a night gray fiberment paneling so
same material different color uh we the bay itself was finished with off-white metal panels and that was changed uh to a cedar finish metal siding that siding was previously used uh as an accent to
the garage door um and we just moved that up to the bay window and then lastly here speaking of the garage door uh we originally had that accent in an 8ft door or I think a 9 foot door I'm sorry uh that was uh increased to a 10-ft door and was moved to be centered
on the bay windows above oh and then the last thing you could see we have a very small minimal 4-inch coping at the top of the building previously that has been upgraded and um so that now we have a 1T8 uh foot tall
aluminum wrapped cornice that will be black moving on to the rear elevation there's one minor change here previously we had uh two awning windows in the bathrooms on the back and those were changed to casement windows roughly the same size
window just put them on their side and then lastly on the side elevation where we have some windows uh these awning windows were not in the uh previous application so those awning windows are all new uh they're each in a bedroom and then lastly you can see what
was the stair that was originally built and then the stair that we're proposing today with the property line so you can see how much shorter it is than what was previously here and then this is the last um side elevation which is unchanged except for
the staircase um that would conclude my presentation unless you want me to address anything directly would you like to to wait until We'll wait till the end okay thank you okay then uh I'm going to proceed with uh Miss Wellel to address
the requested relief is this going to go on forever can we go back just to the Actually go back to the photo thank you i'm I acknowledge that I'm
still under oath and my license is still in good standing um good evening um so uh as was was uh recently discussed we're here for um to address the uh front yard encroachment
variance um and this is under section 345-60 which is the supplementary standards which basically says stairs may project up to 4 feet into any required yard um in this case uh the the stairs as presented and as um would
extend an additional 12 and a half inches so it's 5 feet and just a couple inches um so that's we're the request is for the 12 in which is what essentially like a little over one tread
um this stair condition is uh when you look at it and you talk about you know encroachments into the yard a lot of what we're looking at is how is this consistent with the character of the block and how does it relate to how a pedestrian would view this block as you
can see along this block the way that a pedestrian is going to view these stairs they're going to view them as being far within essentially what most people view as a property because the way that this block is treated is a lot of people are
utilizing what is actually public property it's part of the public right of way but for them they're treating it as their front yard and that's historically it happens all over Jersey City and it's a very common condition on this block um so as you can see here in the photo again when we look at this stair
in relation to what is happening directly adjacent to us our stair looks very far back from our neighbor stair um it's farther you know if you look farther down the block you actually see somebody's porch is actually you know
potentially partially or if not mostly within the public right of way so when you look at this um you think you know the stair encroachment does not negatively impact the pedestrian access along this block frontage the the
streetscape and the sidewalk is still completely free um so I really I think the the question here is the benefit weighing outweighing the detriment so the the the
the detriment here is that 1 foot and 6 in of additional stair into a front yard encroachment the detriment I I don't really see a detriment in terms of how do we just to
it's it's 12 inches one foot and a half one foot and a half inch not 12 not 18 inches oh it's not 18 inches it's 12 feet and a half an inch 12 in 12 and a half inches 12 and a half inches my apologies um
we'll take it so the there are you know whether or not there are detriments you know there I don't perceive this as being a substantial detriment to the public because the public's right of way and how they perceive this you know frontage and how they perceive the
streetscape they're not going to notice that this stair is you know beyond what is typical which is the four feet because it's so far back from what the public pre you know understands as the public realm um Overall I think the the
benefit here is that they are you know uh establishing and and continuing that public you know streetscape they're going to be installing a new street tree where there wasn't one previously um they are going to create and continue that street wall that continuous street
wall through the landscaping that they're proposing so the landscaping it will extend into the public rightway but what it does is it helps to continue and establish that street wall which creates you know a continuous uh street and
that's what people expect and what they anticipate when they walk down a street they want to see something that's continuous um and that helps them you know navigate through the public realm um so I I really don't see that there's a substantial detriment by that that additional
um uh encroachment into that public right of or into the the front yard um we're also here um because there is um there are some design standards that
were within the Jersey City um LDO um that talk about what is recommended and not recommended um and it really basically states that design that the design of a project should be the scale orientation and style consistent with
adjacent development um this project was a was approved um as a two family which is conforming use um by the building department um and uh
looking at what the design standards talk about they talk about scale uh this project is a conforming bulk it's a conforming height um it is conforming setbacks it's conforming coverages so in terms of scale this project is
completely conforming with what is permitted within the R1 district when we talk about orientation the project has a very it's a conforming and consistent orientation it's facing the street um
you know it is meeting those setback standards so in terms of orientation I would say that we are consistent um and then the last is style and style is really a very subjective um um item um there are a wide variety
of design styles evident on Dwight Street um there are brick row homes there are detached houses with peaked and flat roofs there are detached houses that have architectural pediments which uh provide the illusion of peaked roofs um or hipped roof lines but have flat
roofs behind them so there really is a very wide range of architectural styles up and down this this block um almost all these homes are elevated off the street with stairs and a stoop um so while 16 Dwight Street has a more modern design style um than found some
elsewhere on street there really are uh all of the elements that are consistent with the context of that block um it has that elevated front door it has the flat roof of the corners consistent with 13 Dwight Street and 46 Dwight Street it has building materials that are found
throughout the block including the brick the hardy you know hard sighting as um and metal panels all of which are really quality materials um so there really is a a design quality here that that is found um and so I think really that design and the scale of the building
meets that intent of those R1 district while modernizing it to a mixture of new and current residents in the area um in looking at the municipal land use law I would say that this is consistent with the municipal land use law uh purpose a um it is an appropriate development for
the site it is a conforming two family dwelling it meets all of the the bulk standards um except for the the stair issue um we are meeting light air and open space with all those those setbacks um and it it promotes that a desirable
visual environment um again it's it's a a quality materials um it's going to be adding that street tree it's adding that landscaping in the front yard which are the requirements um I don't see a substantial detriment from the variance requested as I said um we're still
promoting that safety for pedestrians by providing that consistent pedestrian travel path which is a sidewalk and providing that visual um uh street wall with the landscaping um and I don't think there's substantial um impairment to the intent and purpose of the zone
plan um again the design scale of the building meets the intent of the R1 district while modernizing it um and it fulfills the purpose of the R1 neighborhood uh housing district uh to accommodate uh encourage incompatible
infill uh preserve the streetscape and preserve on street parking um it is important uh that the the zone acknowledge and celebrate uh the physical assets of the existing community as well as create high quality diverse housing types uh that will
accommodate the needs of all residents so I think really that that um the the requested variance can be granted and that both it meets both the positive and the negative criteria um and and that's my testimony okay thank you thank you
okay now I I do have one more witness i'd like to bring up my client so he can speak to um how the the stairs came about and their decision decision- making around that okay the truth i do take your full name please yakov
Bendler spell your full name uh Y A K O V last name Bendler b I N D L E R okay uh Mr bendler uh you are the owner of the property is that correct one of the Yes one of the owners okay and so
you you were here during the testimony regarding um well just the prior testimony correct yes okay so can you give an overview or or a summary or an explanation um as to how how the how the
stairs came into being constructed prior prior well let me ask you first the the stairs being constructed you do you understand that those when you constructed those that they were not they were subject to the approval of this board uh the first one no no no no this this
this one that you just did yes okay okay and you understand if it's not approved tonight that you run the risk of of uh um remedy deconstructing these correct okay all right now if you could give the
board the benefit of how this came about right so um I have been in this business for 40 years and sometime uh you make a mistake and sometime you
get carried away and in this particular project two things happen at one first we made a mistake and the second one when we demolished the old stairs and we started putting trying to figure out
what we can do there because not everything could be done on paper we got carried away so basically what you see in this picture is a lifesize prototype
of the stairs few we are showing what could be done but there's no presumption on our part that because we spend time and money you will go ahead and approve it
so it's understood by us so it's a lifesize prototype of what could be done so it's your decision obviously I don't need to tell you that um but that what I said was we got carried away a little bit we have our
masons finishing the building and we just we just did it um it's a mistake but there's no there's no malice i mean we're not trying to push you to do
something i don't think you would judging by what happened last time you had two projects we made two mistakes you allow one proceed and you stop the other one we understand how it works so
in this particular case again look at the pictures look at what we propose and make your decision on merits that's that's basically we're sorry i mean there's no like I say there's no
disrespect to this body we're not presuming anything we spend some time and money and that's what happens so we're sorry it's not going to happen again we're in this town and we're building a lot we learned our
lesson we'll move ahead okay thank you yeah any any are you okay yeah that that that completes our presentation so we'll defer to the board for Okay is there anyone there's anyone from the public here to make any comments or ask any
questions okay close the public portion of the meeting um commissioner do you want to ask questions or do you want to hear from the staff first or No question I guess okay let's hear from the question go ahead Peter i guess uh I guess the biggest question
is that if this board had requested plans even if you're saying that you can't put everything on a piece of paper and that this is a prototype it just the question is still why did you not make
plans by and have an architect architect submit them in advance to spending the time and money materials manpower etc to build what you are defining as a prototype
right um again it just it just happened we were doing it in parallel there was an architect three times he went and and we measured everything and something wasn't
correct and the sidewalk was a little bit if you look at the picture the sidewalk is a little bit out so you kind of trying to catch the sidewalk with the stairs and it just little things and we we were trying to do it and we put
together is everything came together at the same time right i'm not saying that we haven't clean it up after we made the the the papers but uh but we just we just we just did it and and just as an
illustration I understand to a certain extent what you're saying but but there is the saying that goes that when you don't get it right you go back to the drawing board right and you're saying that for whatever reasons that your
architects felt they couldn't come to a solution no he came to the solution he his solution was exactly solution that that that we were we we kind of we were moving together and that was a solution that we thought is good that's why we're
asking you to to go ahead and and and approve it and give us a variance because that's the most appropriate solution that we we we found okay so then the question is if you f thought that you came up with an appropriate solution why did you not submit plans to
this board before you did per perform construction that's because I mean it didn't just happen there were many people that were involved you had to get materials somebody had to direct the people things don't just happen there's a mindset there's a rationing there's a
reason behind it and that's the question why where do you think why what do you think i my my question is to you the question is what you're thinking i There was not much thoughts behind it can Can I add to that sure Mr baron um you know you keep
talking about the stairs we keep talking about the steps and you still need 12 and a half inches or whatever okay but there were so many other changes you just made other changes like the material the windows different items you added different things you took away so
and you just did it without even bringing those plans back let me finish please you you didn't bring those plans back to get approval through the zoning board through um the person who was working with you and it was clear the last time we met that you had to bring
the plans to us before you did anything and that didn't happen get carried away on one project but we gave you enough leeway if I if I may I mean the the the changes in the materials in the windows I mean let's
not forget it takes two years to build this house during this time materials change there was an issue with supplies there were an issue with a lot of things and it was it was not at our understanding
that for example the form of the window how it's located needs to be approved is it that is a common practice that we established in the division of zoning if there are changes in the field with
materials for whatever reason for constraints with um like acquiring the materials that's fine it happens we understand that but architects and developers come back with the changes in those plans we review
them and we approve them or if there is an issue we say it then and there there is a constant back and forth we have in our zoning review application process now are you saying that the windows horizontally positioned windows versus
Okay so just let's just be clear here there were several changes let lift up if if I could try to clear this up a little bit there there were no further changes between the last the time we were here and tonight other than correct
the stairs and then the other change is this this is a two family home but for the stairs it's typically called an over- thecounter permit so it's not like a full-blown site plan where you come back and you you change the window sizes
and you or or materials you go back to the planning board or the zoning board for that administrative amendment those are changes that they're they're permitted as of right so you can make the changes and you can go back and forth but it's not it's this would not
but for the the stairs uh you'd you wouldn't have to go to a board i mean and we're here asking for a waiver i mean that's we're this was approved the the design the urban design look was approved initially by the zoning office and that's why you proceeded to the
building you know the building department otherwise it would have been stopped then but I just All right do we have can we hear from staff yeah okay thank you Mr harrington um okay
so I do just want to again clarify that when changes do occur during the process they always have to come back this is a common condition that you also see on zoning board applications which say
No this this that everything has to that if there are changes that the applicant has to come back for approvals this is the same practice that we have in the division of zoning and it just simply didn't happen
i also want to question why a prototype was necessary if you guys had come to us and proposed the solution and the board in the in the instance that it had approved
that's when it was time to prototype that's when it was time to make sure that it was okay with construction code and if during in the field the solution wasn't working out then you come back and you say it's not working out we need
to figure a different solution that's the process so I don't understand where Excuse me let Miss Pereira continue please and maybe you want to speak to this but I don't understand why there was a need for a prototype i I don't disagree with
what Miss Pierre is saying and um it that's that's the way it should have happened and that's why I kind of reverting back to it uh that if you look at it as as if it weren't there you know is
it is the is there justification for the variance it it definitely was it was a misstep you they absolutely should have gone to your office and spoke to you about it but um my I'm submitting we all
know they didn't right but we is is the stair there um appropriate i and that that that's kind of where we're coming from and I you know there's I can't I can't put a justification for for not following that
process um you can't you know put the the rabbit back in the hat you know um but I'm just saying if you if you look at it is is the stair appropriate and if you look at that photo we showed I think it shows that that it's appropriate with
the the rest of the street okay thank you do you have anything else Mr it also begs the question why are we all here for why is there a review process before things are constructed that is because we've created a zoning standards which
are in the best interest of the public and we are the keepers of that we are trying to make sure that development that goes that is done from here on out is done in the best interest of the public
and this completely negates all of that work as well and with that staff has no further comments okay thank you uh do the commissioners have any questions or comments or should we just go move to a
vote okay any I will Okay um can I I'm now asking for a motion to vote on um Z2024-000066 can I get a motion madam Chair I'd like to make a motion to
approve Case Z204-000066 as presented to the board this evening yeah oh what I did what did I say that's okay no no oh can I get a second second okay commissioner Bar
no commissioner Bole no commissioner Patel no commissioner Burns no commissioner Allen no vice Chair Rule no
madame Chair Coyle no motion does not carry zero in favor seven opposed okay that ends our business for the evening um less for the public portion of the meeting do we have any
resolutions that we need to memorialize or Okay okay ready Iris does he realize my microphone doesn't work how's that better okay i can hear you don't worry all right so the first uh uh resolution
to approve is case Z2023-000020 the applicant is Pascal Investments LLC the address was 74 Bower Street this was an application for a site plan amendment this was decided on
December 7th of 2023 at that time uh the commissioners in intend in attendance were chair Coyle vice chair Aoyo commissioners Shadid Allan Boille and Sublicki that passed
six in favor none opposed all in favor of memorializing that is I and the next the next three occurred on March 6th and on March
6th was Chair Coyle Commissioner Ziplicki Patel Baron Boille Burns and Allen all three of these applications that I'm about to give you passed seven in favor none opposed so the first one
is Z 20220019 the applicant was Frank PZA it was a final major site plan amendment for 136 Delaware Avenue again that passed seven in favor none opposed all
in favor of memorializing that i I and the next one same date same vote uh it's case Z2024-000045 the applicant was 850 Westside LLC it was a preliminary and
final ma major site plan approval with a Dvariance for use uh again that passed seven in favor none opposed all in favor of memorializing that is I I and the last one heard on that date of March 6th
seven commissioners same vote is case Z204-000044 the applicant was SASM Morris Company LLC the address was 83-89 Morris Avenue that was a preliminary and final major site plan
approval with C and D variances all in favor of memorializing that i I And the last one which was heard tonight so we all know who's here and we all know that passed seven in favor none opposed that was KZ
2025-000013 Avanar Westside Square LLC that was the amendment uh to the previously approved preliminary and final major site plan with variances and conditions that was 1075 Westside Avenue
also known as 80 Broad Street all in favor of memorializing that i and that concludes it for this evening all right can I get a motion to adjourn the meeting motion second okay all in favor i I
Close the record thank you good night close the record eric great