The Red Bank Planning Board will come to order this day, January 28th, 2026. The time is 7:06. Adequate notice of this meeting has been posted at the burough hall filed with the burough clerk and mailed to the
Asbury Park Press in the two river times. No new cases will be heard after 10 p.m. The board will adjourn for recess at 8:30 p.m. >> Welcome. >> Mayor Portman
absent. Shauna Ebangs present. Christina Bonatagus >> present. >> Damnuso absent. Lou Deanto >> present. >> Barbara Boz >> present. >> Megan Massie >> here. >> Wilson BBE >> here. >> It's Hernandez absent. Frederick Stone
>> here. >> And Brian Carnegan >> present. We have an administrative matters of the minutes from the middle of January 14th. Could I have a motion to >> I motion to approve? >> A second, please.
>> Second. >> All in favor? >> Thank you. >> Can we move the resolution? >> You can. So we have resolutions for the appointments of the board attorney, board engineer, board conflict engineer,
and the board conflict attorney. May I have a motion to approve? >> A motion to approve. >> Second, please >> second. >> Does that have to be a roll call? >> You can do that also. >> All in favor? All favor. Everything will
be in all favor. Okay. All in favor? I. Thank you. I We have one one hearing tonight. Do I have to read all this >> numbers and stuff? >> Did you just call the just call the application and >> the Yes,
>> these two names. >> Okay. The 170 Broad Street, block 104, lots 14 and 15. Applicant Bank of America. Yes. Thank you. >> You just have to bring a mic really
close to you. >> Still haven't fixed it. >> They said it. >> I'm sorry. Is that better >> again? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Does it pick up on the part?
>> Oh, please don't. I don't need an accent. >> Good. >> Good evening, members of the board. My name is Tasia. >> No, I don't think it's working. Is it
turned on? >> I was told it's supposed to be working. >> I've been namedia, attorney with Trout and Pepper Lock. in Princeton representing Bank of America
National Association which is the applicant in this matter and is the tenant at the subject location. We are here this evening seeking approval of a plumearium final
site plan. The hearing was originally uh scheduled for December 10th, 2025 at which time the board took jurisdiction based on the proof of notice. We submitted it accords
with the miscellaneous law and at our request the matter was carried tonight. So um I believe the board does have jurisdiction to proceed matter. >> Yes, council. We agree we have
jurisdiction and just for the sake of the record I'm going to mark in two exhibits. Uh exhibit A1 is going to be the engineering plan which was prepared by Stonefield and exhibit A2 will be the boundary and topographic survey. Other than that I have the following board
exhibits. Exhibit B1 as in board one will be the TNM review letter of November 25th, 2025. Exhibit B2 will be the Jay Treat Commission's review letter of January 25th, 2026. It's an email.
And exhibit number B3 will be from the RBEC chair. Uh it's also it's also an email dated Tuesday, January 27, 2026. Thank you. Yeah.
Did you receive the response letter of Brook Stonefield maybe January 15th or 16th? >> Yes, I believe we have that, right? We we do have that letter. I normally don't I normally don't mark those in. I
usually accept uh through testimony. >> Yes. >> Very good. Uh just a little bit of background on this application. The subject property is identified as lots 14 and 15 in block
104 on the tax map of the burrow. The property is developed with an existing onestory Bank of America building together with a drive-thru of the bank address with 170 Broad Street.
Lot 14 of the property is in the uh PO or professional office uh zone district and lot 15 of the property is in the CCD1 the central uh commercial district one
both districts allow banks as a permitted use pertaining to section 490-4485 and section 490 147A B3 of your ordinance. The bank with this application is
seeking approval to reconstruct the existing parking lot with a new configuration simulation pattern, install drainage improvements, upgrade lighting, and add a new refuge
enclosure. This current project is actually the latest in a series of improvements that the bank has made at the property. Some of which grant approval uh which indicates in our
opinion that the bank has a strong commitment to the redback. Uh the proposed improvements will further modernize the property while providing improved safety and convenience for bank customers and
employees. The operations are undertaken to meet the bank's national uniform standards. Upon receiving a TNM Associates review letter of November 25, 2025, it was decided
to delay the hearing in December so that the applicant could work uh making plan revisions to address the comments of this J. January 16th, as I indicated at the
beginning, we made a resubmission to the board that included a response letter from Skele Engineering to the TNN review letter together with revised plans in a night study. And it's my understanding
those materials have been distributed to the board members. What's the latest revision date on the plan? January 16, 2026. >> January 16, 2026. All right. So that those are the engineering plans. So So we'll just uh note that the and exhibit
A1 will be the plans last revised January 16, 2026 rather than what I said previously. >> And Jackie, you reviewed that and everything's okay. Now from your perspective, >> we did review it. I did not get a chance to reissue our letter um because we just
received it recently, but most of our comments have been addressed um which I'm sure they'll go through, but it is an improvement over the first uh original set of plans in terms of circulation and everything else. >> So, why don't we do this? Why don't we just put on the engineering testimony?
And but Jackie, if you want to direct to anything that's still open, that that that might expedite things. Yeah, >> I don't think this is that complicated of an application. So, I don't think it's necessary to, you know, go through everything from start to finish unless the board needs to hear something.
>> You would it be easier if I go through my letter and say what was addressed? >> If you want, it might be easier just to go through things that haven't been addressed. I guess just point those things out. >> Um, you know what? We we'll swear we'll swear in.
>> We we do. But what but what I'm saying is if we can deal first with the issues that are still outstanding and then you can you can basically we have the overview of what the project is. Unless the board disagrees with me. >> I think I think the board's all on the same page. Um All right. So, but why don't I swear in your witness? Do you
swear any testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth to God? >> And just state your name. Spell your last name for the record. and you are a licensed engineer state of New Jersey and your license is in good standing. Thank you very much. So Jackie, if you just want to take the floor and uh I think that might be the
best way to go. >> Yeah, absolutely. If that's okay with everyone. Okay, so um if you jump to page four of our review letter, that's where our comments start. First uh comment relates to open space. So in
general they've increased the pvious coverage on site but by definition of open space in our ordinance um they are still not meeting the open space requirement because we don't count
open space if it's less than 325 square ft. Um however they are increasing like the grass area. Um so we would say that's making something better and not
necessarily making something worse. Right? So but that is um they're they are increasing pvious but they are not meeting uh the open space requirement. So, I wanted to point that out to the board um
in case they wanted them to increase the open the the open space areas in the parking area because I know that's that's important. Um so, I'm leaving you would ask. >> So, it's actually only variance in the whole application.
>> Correct. Correct. Well, not responding. >> Oh, it's a pre-existing not. >> You don't meet the open space requirements that with this application, we're actually increase albeit a small
amount. So, we're actually improving the amount of open space. So, it would be my position since we're not exasperating the uh and not performing no barriers will be required. Now, you know, again, there may be some opinion about increase
further increases and we can talk about that. Um, but we're never going to meet the uh the 25% on the one lot and and well, we actually meet the other lot requirement, which is 10%. We're actually we do
exceed the 10% open space requirement on the one lot. But with respect to yellow a lot because again there are different open space requirements depending what zone the property is in. So it complicates the situation. Again this is
an existing building with existing improvements. We're not trying to take away improvements. We're trying to just you know beautify or upgrade the improvements. >> Okay. How would the applicant um conform to the open space? like what would they
have to do in order to meet the requirements? >> Um they they would have to they probably have to add a lot more
islands, eliminate parking spaces significantly. Yes, we would lose large numbers of market pieces. And in our opinion, that goes in the wrong direction for for this use. >> I'm not going to do my usual spiel, but
um how how often are these parking spaces used? Are they have you ever done a parking study there? Like are they wildly used? I have not done it study but I adise that
there is a need for those parking spaces. Now we might be able to reduce capital um spaces to add but again it's not going to >> we're never going to meet the
requirement. We're currently proposing 33 parking spaces as a part of this new site plan and that is the requirement for this site. So if we were to remove any more parking spaces that would create a variance I'm not going to be the only one that
brings it up all the time. Maybe we'll see that Megan can continue but that's >> that's problem honestly. I'm >> sorry. What's the existing parking? >> 36 365
>> it's going down. >> So you're reducing. Okay. >> I can I can continue and you guys can think about that if you want. >> Should be happy. Um >> let me see all our comments on page five were addressed. Um
>> so by reconfiguring the the spaces in the circulation they are proposing 33 spaces instead of 34. >> They're 36 currently. >> There's 36.
>> Okay. So they're going from 36 to 33 which is still what's required by which is still what's required by ordinance. >> Okay. >> No 34 is required. >> Oh 34 is required. >> Yeah. And they're providing 33. >> 33 is required. They don't have a
>> varian required. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Sorry. Backwards. Literally the only variance is the open space ordinate is the open space variance which as council has indicated you know they already violate that and they're making the condition better
>> if you could just speak a little bit. >> So on page five there is the comments about the electric vehicle late breaks. We are not proposing one. Um there's no additional expansion to the building. We're not adding barking just striping.
So, um it's my understanding with the code that this application does not require an EV space. >> But no, I I I think legally she's correct that she does not need to. If you're not touching the parking lot, it's if you're not redoing the parking lot and all they're doing is is striping, then they would not be
required to add any make spaces. The state doesn't envision you having to rip up your parking lot. They didn't put in the infrastructure for that. Okay. On page six, um we just want testimony to confirm for 4.1
that you are not increasing any runoff into the municipal system. >> Can you confirm that? >> This is correct. Everything on site flows to There's basically one inlet in the bottom right corner. Everything flows there. I guess then eventually
there are some bonding conditions that are in the near the bay against that that herb where we are proposing a trench drain could um to there be a trench drain or not the storm water runoff would eventually reach that inlet
that is in the bottom right this is just improving the conditions that will be on site for for ponding and once this ice melts and it freezes or melts and decreases. Um, it will probably be a little slippery in that
area, but once we install the trench train, it will just be improved conditions for that. Yes, there's no increases from that. Thank you. Um, I don't know if we want them to talk
about the new circulation. Does anybody have questions on that? I'm curious about these two illustrations uh in the uh in the revised plan. >> Right. There's two illustrations
on the circulation. >> Yes. >> I didn't quite understand. >> So I actually picked up an exhibit that shows the trash truck a little bit more refined since we only 230
at this time. Um, I have received a picture as a front loading trash truck which uh will be able to maneuver the new refues enclosure much much easier. And then also the emergency circulation
vehicle we showing, you know, a a typical fire truck um that is able to to circulate the site, you know, using the ingress. sequence out on Broad Street, which is the
most desirable and comfortable movement for that trucking. Then probably if they would have to utilize the site, then that's how it would >> that's fine. That's all I need. Thank you. >> Uh continuing on page 65.2, to um the
parallel spaces uh in the parking lot is um I believe we'll need a waiver because you need a 9 by 21 uh space and you're proposing an 8 by 20. Can you provide testimony to support
that waiver, please? So, uh you're proposing a two parallelo, as you said, we are proposing that these will serve as employee spaces. Their ordinance that allows complex reasons as small as six or sorry 8 feet by 16 feet where
controlled utilization such as employee parking is for subcompact vehicles. So we have proposed to mark these as employee spaces um and make sure that it's appropriately signed in. >> Are they indicated on the plans as being employee spaces?
>> Yes, they are called as spaces. >> Okay. So that'll be a condition of approval that those spaces will be uh all all of them are going to be employee spaces only. >> Two of them but both sorry both spaces will be employee spaces. Thank you.
>> H76.1 uh we'd like to uh get some testimony in terms of the trees and payment in L. Um can you address that? At this time, we are planning to contribute into the
tree funds of the two trees that are required. Um, so $2,000. The front or the front of Broad Street of our property going from south to north. The south third of our front hitch is is a
is our driveway. And then after that, we have a street tree. Then there's a utility pole. And then um almost immediately after that is the next property, the next driveway on for the next property. So we believe that the contribution to the tree front is
appropriate. >> Thank you. Um and will you agree to revise the plans to clarify the proposed species in the landscaping islands? >> Yes. Yes. >> Um can you uh 6.4 four. Can you talk about
the light study? Um, it looks like you did a light study and you're meeting the minimum lighting levels. Can you confirm that? Yes, this is correct. We provided the light study exhibit
and um we are not proposing um any large revisions to the lighting. We are relocating one of the light poles to allow for the parking uh the parking updates and anything that is um that
will be proposed is going to match what's already there. And then also there's the uh question about if um the lighting is motion sensored or when it's on it turns on and does it stays on till
dawn. So it's not motion sensored or That's all I had except for any place. >> Sorry, Jackie. I don't have your review letter in front of me. Did they address all the comments in the the environmental commission email with like the providing a bike rack?
>> Yeah. Okay. So the uh removal of the tree that is within we're removing a tree within the island within along the waist then we are
agreeing to propose a tree that is in the island the landscape island to the right of the next comments are regarding to kind of like an elevated storm water detention system. They don't believe this is a typical this is a minor um site plan. We
are increas or increasing the per space. We're providing improvements to the site. So I don't believe that a you know subgrade storm water retention system is isable for guest application. Neither do we believe that the verbous asphalt as
well. Then um the next comment is considering dark sky approved luminers for a color temperature of 3,000 or less. We are just going to propose what is on site currently to to match it. I'm not sure
of the the dark sky specifically. Um but what is on site we will match it. And then finally we will come back to our gra along the front of street. there's some room right in front of the building which I think would um be appropriate.
>> What I usually do as a condition is with the bike racks I make it so that you have to submit the location to Jackie and then Jackie will confirm as long as she's okay with the location then that should work assuming the board's fine with that but as long as there is a bike
shade tree comments. >> Yes. So um the street tree comments the first comment being the uh deficiency of the two street trees along Broad Street which I provided testimony um that we will contribute to the fund
and then uh the proposed island plantings along the road side of the property. They're recommending a true place in there for you to talk. >> That's board. That's all I have. I don't know if the board has any questions. Some questions on the on the trees on
the Loy Place side. There are currently uh there is an island kind of in the in the center of the two uh entrances uh that has trees in it. And then there's an island on um there's
two islands, right? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Are all those trees remaining? >> So the ones that are kind of straddling our property line will remain the 20in and the 24in tree, but the 6in tree that is a little bit further into
the site we are planning to remove. Um and then we would replace with a a tree on the adjacent island. Okay. Thank you. >> Are there any are there any other questions for the board?
>> Oh, yeah. Sorry. Uh for the lighting, is there any possibility of making it motion sensor just so that we don't have just lights on for the entire night? Or is there like a can you only have like the security ones on and maybe ones that are
unnecessary motions standard? >> Okay. The Yeah, the security lighting that is around the ATM must be on. >> Yeah, of course. Yeah. But uh where are the other locations of the lights?
>> They're within the parking lot. So there's kind of one like right between the two driveways. There's one um on the left side of the the parking area. Then there's one all the way to the rear of the parking lot.
And then there's one or two that are along Leroy Place kind of where the parallel parking spaces are proposed. >> Okay. And those are existing like Leroy. >> Okay.
>> Increasing the amount of I ask if there was any I was going to ask if there was any one in the audience but >> you can take >> madam chair we can take note that there is no one in the audience >> there's no one in the audience thank you
so there were no comments >> I would propose the approval of this plan as presented uh with the stipulations as discussed to be resolved uh in conjunction with the engineer. >> Second,
>> Shauna Ebanks, yes. Christina Bonitakis, yes. Louis Dementoto, >> yes. >> Barbara Boz, >> yes. >> Massie, Wilson BB, >> yes. >> Frederick Stones, >> yes. >> And Brian Parne, >> yes.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> At some point, we should talk about Sher Park. >> Yes. >> Look at this. >> Like a light. >> I know. That's good. Look at
that spot. Look at these spots. >> It is sharable. This is >> Should we have a motion to >> move part second? >> All right. >> I thought you had something.
>> I like a board more.