Okay. The Red Bank Zoning Board of Adjustment will come to order this 19th day of March 2026. Time is 6:30. Roll call, please. >> An Tori absent. Ray Mass >> here.
>> Greg Fitzgerald absent. Jonathan Gilde >> here >> and Cruz absent. Vincent Light >> here. >> Paul Kagno >> here. >> Eugene Horowitz >> here. >> Chris Havens
>> here. >> Dorothy Serillo >> here. >> And Dex. >> Okay. In accordance with New Jersey law, this meeting notice has been published in the Edburgh Park Press and the Two River Times and is available on the
municipal website and the New Jersey Secretary of State's website. It is also posted on the municipal bulletin board. The meeting complies with the open public meeting act and will be tape recorded. If the applicant chooses to
use a court reporter to transcribe the recordings, the board requires a copy of the transcript. Break will occur around 8:00 p.m. in a conference room on the first floor. The public is welcome to attend, but discussions with board members will not be allowed. No new
cases will be heard after 9:00 p.m. and a cuto off time is 9:30 p.m. Any applicants not heard will be rescheduled for next meeting. Uh, pledge of allegiance. To the flag of the United States of
America to the stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Okay. Couple administrative uh matters. We have a meeting minutes from March 5th. Anybody like to make a
motion to approve? I'll second. Sean, I did have one itsybitsy correction there. Um, in the meeting attendance, Rebecca Flynn, you hadn't marked either absent or present. So,
>> that's because she was she hasn't been sworn in yet. >> Uh, yeah. >> Then I don't have any corrections. >> Okay. New business. We have 40 Riverside Avenue. Okay, Mr. Chairman, as the applicant teams come forward, we'll just do a
couple of administrative things. First up, did anyone here have any questions, comments, or concerns regarding the sufficiency of the notice they received? All right, we don't see any. Uh, the board secretary and I reviewed the notice and found everything to be in
order. So, it would be my humble opinion that we have jurisdiction to uh proceed tonight. And what we'll do is we'll swear in uh Shauna uh Ebanks uh planner and our director of community development and also uh Jacqueline Dur,
our board engineer. So Shauna and Jackie, if you could raise your right hands, do you both swear that the information and testimony you're about to provide to the extent you provide any will be the truth to the best of your knowledge to help you guide? >> Let the record reflect. Both uh uh witnesses have been sworn. And Mr. Mr.
Chairman, what we'll do is we will mark into the record what we as a board have before us. So A1 is the uh application package. A2 is the preliminary and final site plans prepared by Collier's Engineering and Design dated December
23rd, 2025, 15 sheets. A3, the architectural and landscape plans prepared by Design Generations LLC dated December 15, 2025, three sheets. A4 is the concept plan and renderings uh of the uh pavilion prominad and pavilion
prepared by Collier's engineering and that's undated. A5 stormwater management statement prepared by Collier's engineering dated December 23rd 2025. A6 the environmental impact report Kier's engineering and design dated December 23rd 2025.
A7 is a submission letter prepared by John Junko, the attorney, dated January 13, 2026. A8, the I'm sorry, intent to proceed, dated January 12th, 2026. A9 is the disclosure of ownership form.
Uh A10 is the land development escrow agreement. Uh A1 is the denial of application prepared by Shauna and that's dated October 20th, 2025. A12 is the bulk variance request list
dated December 23rd, 2025. A13 is the design waiver request list dated December 23rd, 2025. A14 is the submission waiver request list dated December 23rd, 2025. A5 is a project description
and slashnarrative. And I guess last but not least, we'll mark as A16 is the TNM Associates review memorandum dated March 12th, 2026. Um, so what we're going to do is, uh, we'll introduce turn this over to, uh,
John Junko. Uh, uh, Mr. Junko is an attorney who's been before us before. And then, uh, Mr. Junko, as I understand it, with corporate applicants, we usually do a little bit of a, uh, disclosure to make sure we have no known uh, conflicts with any of the uh,
principles of the entity. But as I understand and reading the corporate disclosure, your entity is a nonprofit corporation and there's no 10% shareholders per se. >> Correct. >> Okay. So that having been said, uh good evening and welcome,
>> Mr. Chairman, members of the board, John Junko appearing on behalf of the applicant and as uh we've dis Kevin has identified, we've submitted an application for an existing facility. Um this is the uh Springoint facility
located at um 40 um River Street. In any event, this application is seeking to uh add improvements to the site. It is not proposing any additional units. The
number of residents and uh is the same. And this is designed to add amenities to the project to serve those uh residents. And those amenities are on a deck that faces the river. And it
includes the um a a pavilion, fire pits, seating areas, and basically some walk areas and plantings to make it comfortable. There's also an addition proposed to a
previously approved dock or marina that had four slips approved and now will seek to expand that to 20 slips. There's an application now pending at NJP for that uh project and it has been declared
complete and is being reviewed for approval. Um what we would like to do tonight is I have uh three witnesses to present. Our civil engineer is uh Anthony Calvano who's right here. Then uh Jack um
uh Kramer, excuse me, is our uh architect and Andrew Janu is our planner. So this project seeks a number of variances, many of which are related to the existence of the building. However, the
board has in the past recognized that this facility is an inherently beneficial use to the community in the prior resolutions. I would expect that that continues, but our planner will will address that issue to support it,
but it hasn't changed. It remains a nonprofit uh business and continues to serve the same ta basic population of senior citizens. So, with your permission, I would like to call Anthony Calvano, ask him to be sworn. I'll ask
him to present his credentials and then present his uh testimony. >> Okay. >> Anthony. >> All right. Good evening. If you could just uh state your name and spell your last name and state your address. >> Supposed to have this.
Uh Anthony Calvano uh Collier's Engineering Design 101 Crawford's Corner Road Sweet 3400 in Homebell. Um >> before you start your testimony. >> All right. Good evening and welcome. Do you swear that the information and testimony you're about to provide will be the truth to best your knowledge to
help you God? >> I do. >> And just for the record, you're testifying tonight in your capacity as a licensed >> uh professional engineer. >> Okay. And just for the record, your licenses, qualifications, certifications are current, up to date, and in good standing. >> Yes, they are. >> Thank you.
>> Okay. C can you give us a little background? So, >> yeah, absolutely. So, I'm a graduate of uh the New Jersey Institute of Technology with a a bachelor's in civil engineering. Um I've been uh at Kier's Engineering and Design, formerly Messer
Consulting, um for approximately 10 years now, um working on site plans and related civil engineering work and I I've been uh licensed in the state of New Jersey for approximately five. >> Have you appeared before other boards in New Jersey and as an expert witness?
>> Uh yes, I have. >> Okay. Thank you. >> That that Okay, >> good. So, um, you're you're accepted now as an expert and a couple of basic questions. Did you or others under your direction prepare the plans and exhibits that have been submitted to this board in support
of the application? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, we all know where the property is, but for purposes of the record, could you advise as as to address and lots and lot? >> Uh, yes. And I'm going to just put up uh aerial exhibit. So, I think
>> now all the exhibit can find me, Mr. Chairman. All the exhibits you're going to present were prepared by you or others under your direction for presentation this evening. Is that correct? >> That's correct. >> Right. >> John, >> Mark, these exhibits that you're bringing up. Okay. So, I guess we're up
to A17. And what is A17? >> So, it's going to um aerial exhibit. >> Got it. >> Uh with today's date, uh March 19th. >> This has today's date on it. >> Uh correct. Uh A17 is an aerial exhibit.
>> Okay. And um >> this is >> A17. >> Yep. And we're also going to have >> You want to mark them all now, Mr. Chairman? >> Yeah. And so so this one I don't think needs to be marked. This um was from the site. >> Let's mark it in case you want to refer to it. >> Okay. Well, so this is from the site
plan which was A2. Uh it's sheet we're actually going to use this this one uh sheet 3.00 O the overall dimension plan. Thank you. >> Kevin, Mr. Kennedy, do you want to mark this as two exhibits? One each sheet. >> Uh is it what? Front and back or All right. Yeah. A18. And we'll do the next
one. A19. >> And what is A19? Site plan sheet. >> Um the overall dimension plan is exhibit A18. And the uh dimension plan 3.01 1 is
exhibit 19. >> Perfect. >> Okay. And then um we're also going to be showing um what was previously submitted as A4 the the con the concept plan and rendering um prepared by Collers and and uh
undated. >> Undated. So that'll be A20. >> Okay. Oops. And then um on the other side at the last one. So this is going to be a landscape uh rendering
>> prepared by um prepared by uh Design for Generations LLC. >> And is there a date on it? >> March 15th. >> Thank you. That'll be A21.
>> I I got a quick question for you. Is there anywhere on that plan where the designated right of way goes that you have to provide along the river? >> Okay. I I think you're referring to to the the access easement and and and yes,
that there is an existing um access easement uh >> as >> No, the access easement is an easement that benefits our site. They're talking about the Riverwalk, >> right? Public access easement. >> Public access, correct? >> Yep. So, the so the public access easement that was uh previously approved
under the prior application, it remains it's and it's going to be unmodified as part of this uh application. If I may ask one question on it, do does any of this application affect that in any way? >> No. >> And it is a if I can report to the
board. It is of record. It's a recorded easement. >> Right. >> Okay. >> So, I'm going to be referring to right now A17, which is the aerial exhibit. >> So, just to orient um the property we're talking about here, it's uh 40 Riverside
Avenue. uh known as block 7 lots 12.03 and 12.04 um where 12.03 is is the main lot with the improvements and 12.04 is is a repairing grant lot. Um but it's all um
under common ownership and as part of this application um lot 12.03 is approximately 1.9 acres and the repairarian lot 12.04 104 is approximately half an acre. Um the property is bounded as you can
see by the Navas River to the north. Um residential apartment communities to the west and the east and then Riverside Avenue um to the south. The site is within the waterfront
development WD zone um where the existing as uh Mr. Junko alluded to previously. Um it the senior living facility is a pre-existing non-conforming use which was previously uh approved by the board
and as part of this application which I'll get into. Um a marina as defined by by the Redbank ordinance is proposed and that's a conditional use in the zone. >> Mic up closer. >> I apologize. >> There you go. and um I'll run through uh
the conditional use requirements that are met um for this project for the marina use. So I'm now going to refer to A18 which is the overall dimension plan sheet 3.0 from the submitted site plan
set. There's two aspects of the project. So the first is a reconstruction of uh an existing bulkhead and prominade area. The bulkhead is going to be fully reconstructed as well as the prominade
and amenity area. As part of the reconstruction of the prominade and the amenity area, there's a proposed uh pavilion which is approximately 1,800 square feet um 30 30 feet by 60 ft.
the capacity u of the pavilion um based on the information submitted there's there's dining areas there's lounging areas and there's also a grill um you know with kind of tabletop seating area uh the capacity is approximately 80
people in addition to the to the pavilion um as is currently out there's going to be outdoor walkways outdoor seating um and and as uh Mr. Carmen will get into with the landscaping generously um you know
landscape garden area for for the residents. The second aspect of this application is um what's considered the marina um so you can see to the north going into the river. So there is an existing um pier and floating dock on the site. So the
proposal is to reconstruct the pier as well as the floating dock and um the marine is submitted to the board as a as a two two-phase application. So the first phase is the first um you know what what I'll kind of call the H of the
floating dock. So >> if I may, it's one application. What we're asking for is the board acknow if if the board finds it worthy of approval. You designate we want to do the uh dock expansion in two phases. Now that the the client may change that at
the time of construction and do it all at once. They'd like permission to do two phases of the additional docks. There are four there now and 16 are proposed. >> Right? So the first phase would be four boat slips and the second phase would
add 16 for a total of 20 boat slips. >> But while you're on the uh doc, would you advise the board as to how someone would get there today? And is that route being modified? >> No. So the route to the to the riverfront is from Riverside Avenue on
the south side of the building. um existing sidewalk that comes down the southern property line um comes up to the west um and you know essentially in into the prominade area and >> I was actually referring to the residents who wanted to go to use the
docks. >> Okay. I I apologize for that. Yes. So so so >> didn't ask you a good question. >> So so there's there's no modification um to to the building as part of this application. So they're going to come out the rear side which is or the
riverside which is the north side of the building to access the prominade area >> docks are limited to residents. >> That's correct. So the >> question are the boat slips for exclusively for residents? >> Yes. >> Okay.
>> Okay. And then just to reiterate there is no proposed expansion of the building itself here. So the unit count and and those associated operational features um there is no modification as part of this application. As I mentioned the marina is a
conditional use in the zone. So I'm just going to quickly run through the conditional use standards to show that we are complying fully um with those standards. So the the first >> just just give the board the section the res ordinance number for the record.
>> Yeah. So, so, uh, this is ordinance, uh, 490-125 and the first condition is with regard, I'm going to paraphrase this one, but it's it's with regard to principal and accessory structures associated with the marina use. That's not applicable here
because the pier and the floating dock are essentially standalone. the the pavilion and the prominade area are are not specifically associated with or you know necessary for the for the marina. So that condition would be not
applicable to our situation. In addition, um condition B is with regard to boat storage and display. So there will not be any boat storage or display associated with this marina. strictly for for birthing um boats in the river.
Item C is with regard to um launching facilities. Again, this is not applicable. There is no launching facility proposed. Um you know the boats would be accessing the births uh from the river. Item D is with regard to adequate
utilities. So uh we are complying with that and there will be electric um you know for for hooking up the boats as well as lighting um to the floating dock. There will be uh water service uh for wash down to the floating dock and there will also be a pump out for the
boats um at at the floating dock. Item E is with regard to again out outdoor storage utilizing parking areas. That's not proposed here. That's not applicable because outdoor storage of the boats is not proposed on the site.
The minimum upland uh lot area is 15,000 square ft. Uh the site complies uh it's approximately 83,700 square ft. The last condition is with regard to signs and that's again not applicable here because there are no signs uh
proposed in association with the uh marina. So that kind of sets the stage as far as what's proposed here. Um, as Mr. Junko alluded to, there are a few bulk variances that are being requested here
in this application. The first one is with regard to parking quantity. Um, so there are 162 uh parking spaces currently and just referring back to the
A17 which is the aerial exhibit under com under common ownership uh with the senior living facility is um I'm just going to get the lot and block numbers. So, block seven, lot 16, um,
which is this lot here to the east of the site, um, on the other side of of the apartment building that's under common ownership and is utilized for parking for the senior living facility, as well as block 6, lot 11.01,
um, which is across the street, um, at the corner of Pearl Street and and Riverside Avenue. again under common ownership um wi with the senior living facility and serves the residents of the uh project.
>> That that's correct and there's no proposed modifications to existing parking supply. Um similarly as I mentioned before that you know there's no proposed modifications to the unit count. So
162 are proposed um on site and then in those off off-site lots under conmon ownership. Uh whereas with the full marina buildout um the 20 slips 168 parking spaces will be required
and that was yeah that was an additional 10 um parking spaces required by ordinance. So that's that's necessitating the variance in this case is the marina. But as I mentioned previously, the marina is going to be used solely by residents. So
it's not anticipated that any additional parking demand would be generated. Um it's just an additional amenity for the residents. >> Just to clarify, you have 162 spaces in the site now and before this addition
you required uh uh 58 if I correct. >> Yeah. Um, see if I have that on here. I I think it was 160. >> 160. Yes, >> there were two additional spaces already
in place. However, the additional 10 spaces that would be applicable because of the uh additional dockage. We request a variance from that requirement. you want to. So, we're the ordinance
would require 168, but because the reason for the additional spaces is the uh dock and the dock can only be owned by residents, they're really that parking spaces are already accounted for. And uh that is the uh difference
between what's on site of 162 and the requirement of 168. >> Okay. And you said no boats would be parked in any of the parking lots anywhere. >> That's correct. >> Okay. >> Correct. No, no storage. >> No, no boats or boat trailers. Any of
it. the um part of the uh our client has uh the u of course agreements with all of the residents and that's uh made clear that if they have those that want to have their boat there have to provide
offsite uh winter storage etc. And by the way no service at the site either >> for the boats. Jack >> this on. >> I just wanted to clarify um our letter
on page five, we might have a typo. So on phase one, you're providing four boat slips. Correct. >> That's correct. >> And then on phase two, 16 not 20. Is that right? >> Right. So it's 16 additional for a total
of 20. >> Okay. So by my calculation then that's two plus it should be eight spaces for phase two that's required instead of 10 on page five or of our report. So ultimately the required total is 166.
Um I I I think it would still it would still be the 10 the 10 required be extra. So phase one with the four slips at half a space per boat slip you would be at two two required spaces and then
with the 20 total um at the half you you would be at 10 um spaces would be the requirement >> but isn't your phase what am I am I confused I'm sorry >> what 116 what I'm what it's 16 under phase
two correct 16 boat slips on phase two. >> 16 additional. So 16 plus the original four for 20 20 total boat slips. >> 20 total boat slips. So if 16 *.5 is eight.
So 10 total for the boat slips. >> Yes. 10. in in in the fully built condition of of 20 slips, it would be a a a required parking of 10 spaces associated with the marina uh use.
>> Okay. So the total would be >> four spaces approval that approval, >> right? >> Right. But that's that's what the confusion. >> Okay.
>> It's still 168. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> All right. You can continue. I'll just double double back on the map. >> I'm sorry. I'm just a little confused on the math. There it's going to be 168 total parking spaces >> uh required. >> Okay. And how many are there now?
>> Uh there are 162. >> But I thought you said there are 10 additional. >> That's correct. >> That's math. The requirement was 160. We had 162. The requirement for the uh 20 for that would be 10 additional spaces.
So we would need 10 spaces over 160 to 170. We have 162. We're looking we're seeking a variance for those eight spaces. >> Thank you. >> And that those spaces are required for
the users of the dock. users are already in the building and they're accounted for within the 162. >> I was just confused about the net. Thank >> Okay, >> I I apologize for the confusion on that. But if there's any question um you know, >> just keep going. They're fine. You notice this board is not shy. They'll
ask you what they want to know. >> Yeah, it's correct. 168 math is It was a typo in our letter, but your math is correct. >> Okay. >> It's 168. >> Thank you. >> Sorry. All right. So 168's required and they're proposing Jackie >> 162.
>> Got it. >> But now John, just just so dumb. I'm I'm math is not my song. So if it's 168 required and 162, that's six base variance. I thought you just said eight. So I just want to make sure. >> Yes.
>> Okay. So six base. Got it. >> Thank you. Thank you. So the next variance that is being sought is with regard to I'm going to switch back here to the uh A18
which is the overall dimension plan. So, as I mentioned, a pavilion is proposed approximately 1,800 square ft under the Redbank ordinance that's considered a principal structure um due to the size being greater than 500 square ft.
And therefore, there are the the next two variances are associated with that. So, the first one I'm going to cover is the setback and then the second one is lot coverage, which is essentially a building or a structure coverage is how it should be. uh thought about starting
with the rear setback. So there there's a two-prong requirement to the setback. One of them is to the actual property line and one of them is to the flood hazard line. So in this case, we're seeking a variance for the setback to the flood hazard line. Um this pavilion
uh the the entire prominade area is within a flood hazard area. So the setback is you know essentially zero. So we're requesting a variance whereas 35 ft is proposed from the flood hazard
area. Um if the flood hazard area wasn't there the setback would otherwise be met from the property line. So uh accounting for both lots. So to the rear line of lot 12.04 04 the set back would be 179.7
ft. Um and then the set back to 12.03 um if you were excluding the repairing lot which is out in the river um it would still be 72.6 which would meet the setback requirement of of 35 ft. Um, so
we're meeting it to the set to the property line, but we're requesting uh a variance uh due to the flood hazard uh criteria and a setback requirement. >> Does that pavilion have heating and air conditioning? >> It's it's an openwalled structure. So
yeah, it's it's you know >> under I I I if I may our planner will address this but the uh ordinance because it has a roof it is considered a building structure. It is basically a uh
pavilion, a canopy for people so that they that the residents have a place to uh go under out of the sun if their barbecue or whatever they would be in the making. >> It's got no walls >> pictures with my hands, but basically >> has no walls.
>> It's just no walls. >> That's correct. Yeah. And actually I just to you know clarify that point is uh I'm referring to A20 now the the
rendering and conceptual plan. So so you can see this is the elevation view. So looking at it from the side of the pavilion um and you can see it's you know uh open walled structure um with with with just the roof. >> Mr. Mr. Chairman, a lot of this deck
area was designed by our um um landscape architect, Jack Harmon, who will be the next witness. So, we'll get to better detail about that from Jack in terms of the design and the thinking and Okay. What it's intended to do. >> Great. Thank you.
>> And access to the dining area would only be for residents. >> Yes. Well, I I believe residents can have a guest, but it's not it's apparently that's not a real big uh
activity at the uh residence. So, it is for residents. If somebody has a if they have a guest or a family member, they can of course go throughout the facility and they can go out in the deck and sit. >> But it's not open to the public. >> Yeah. But it's not open to the public
and no nothing. No part of it is open to the public either be uh residents or their guests. >> Can I ask a quick question? Do you have any other photographs that depict the uh the new boat slips that you're going to uh have there? I see some depicted on
the upper leftand corner of the bottom photograph. Do you have a >> perhaps a better photograph that shows the how far out these new slips are going to go? Um so not not in rendered form but if I refer back to
uh A18 which is the overall dimension plan um it gives a gives a perspective here of the uh the length of of the floating dock. >> Yeah. And and there's also there's some boat slips to the right of that up to
your rendering right >> um right right here. Yeah. Yeah. So, so that that's um an existing existing slip area that's associated with a with a different pro uh property, >> right? And then what is the distance to Maple Cove from there? Are you familiar with that cove?
>> I'm sorry. Can you say that again? >> What is the distance from the from the from your new dock with the new slips to Maple Cove? Are you familiar with where Maple Cove is? >> I'm not I'm not Is is that is that the adjacent? >> Uh it's a few uh more lots down to the
right. Okay. >> It's one of the only um launch access sites for the public in town here where people can use private kayaks and stand up paddle boards and things like that. >> Okay. I'm not
>> It's by the right to the >> right where your finger is. >> Where your finger is. That's a public launch for smaller not boats but for kayaks and paddle boards and stuff like that. So, you want to put another 16 boats to the left of that marina there
that has how many boats lives there? >> 20. >> Yeah, I would say approximate approximately 20. >> And then the other marinas to the left, there's two more. And how many boat slips? Like another 50 boat slips. >> Uh, combined from the two of them, I I would say approximately.
>> Okay. Thank you. So >> yes. Uh >> what's the dimension of the slip samples? >> Yes. Yes. Um just give me one second to confirm. So uh there are two sizes. So I'm
referring to A19 which is the dimension plan. So the the eastern are 24 foot long slips and the western side are 40 foot long slips. >> And so 40ft long slip can accommodate a
40ft boat and a 24ft slip can accommodate a 24ft boat. >> Yes. >> Okay. How many residents there today have boats? >> How many designated How many residents today there have boats?
>> 180. >> No residents. >> Yeah. >> Okay. There's no >> And do you have a feel for how many would actually request a slip?
>> I mean, we we can swear him in if we want. >> Yes. >> Well, we can wait later if you want to provide testimony later. >> All right. If you could just state your name and address, please. >> Michael Lursio. I'm actually the corporate director of project planning
and facilities management for Springpoint. The address is >> Hold on. I'm sorry, Michael. Spell your last name. >> L O C. U R CO >> and corporate director >> project planning and facilities
management. >> Facilities management >> for the applicant. All right. Uh if you could just raise your right hand. Do you swear that the information and testimony you're about to provide will be the truth to the best of your knowledge to help you God? >> I do. >> Thank you. >> Mike, first question was, how many
residents have votes today? So, no residents have boats today, but the question was how many we do we perceive might have an interest. So, my experience with the community and walking around and talking to residents, a significant amount of them had boats before they became residents, but had to
sell them, give them to family members, uh, and get rid of their boats because they had no place to bring it. So, we're hoping they'll either purchase boats, bring them in, or we're going to be marketing towards, you know, the clients are bringing them in
and providing either a deed slip with a uh an apartment when they get it or if it's a separate rental. We're not sure, but we're we're pretty confident that we're going to be able to attract new residents who have boats. I actually think it's going to be a great marketing aspect of the community. So, is part of
your proposal maybe having a boat that any of the residents might be able to rent for a day? >> We want So, there's currently a pontoon boat that the community operates, but uh and I'll be honest with you, I'm not involved with how they operate that, but
I believe we have our own captain and the residents sign up for a day trip or something and he takes out, you know, several different residents, but they don't operate that themselves. Okay. But let me ask you last question.
You in your market studies, you've determined that there's a market or demand for this type of living. >> Yes. Okay. >> Thank you. Um so the last uh variance the last bulk variance um
again associated with the pavilion as I mentioned it's considered a uh a primary structure. So it adds to the lot coverage which um in this case again it it should really be viewed as a building coverage uh structure coverage because
that's what it's measuring. So we're proposing a lot coverage uh with the additional pavilion of 40.7% of the lot um whereas 38.1% is existing and um the maximum permitted
is 35%. Anthony, um, with regard to the site, are is all of are all of the site new developments ADA compliant? >> Yes.
>> Okay. Now, with regard to the utilities that are going to be placed on the uh deck, what what do you anticipate to go on deck? >> Right. So, the utilities are going to be fed from the building. So, it's going to
be electric um to both the pavilion and the floating dock, water to both the pavilion and the floating dock. And then there's going to be uh as I mentioned, a pump out for the boats on the floating dock, as well as there's a a sink area associated with the pavilion. So, that's
going to have a a sanitary sewer line um that we're proposing a uh you know, an ingground underground pump station to get that back up to the front of the site and tie into the existing gravity line that's coming out of the building. >> Has your has your design included uh
fire protection for the pavilion in the docks? >> Fire protection will be provided as required uh by the fire code. Um current currently we're anticipating it it's likely going to be uh limited to
essentially portable um you know portable extinguishers but um you know should our MEP engineer determine that that the code requires something more we're going to provide that and we're going to meet meet the code of the state of New Jersey. >> And of course this plan will comply with
the uh Redbank fire officials requirements. >> Yes. Okay. Now, with regard to the unoccupied open space, could you describe what's available and how you calculated it?
>> Yes. So the unoccupied open space is um per the ordinance requirements. It's very similar to uh impervious versus pvious coverage uh calculation but there are a few uh
few nuances where some even uh pvious coverage so a grass area if it's too small in a parking lot it doesn't count towards the definition of unoccupied uh open space. Um however our project is
as I mentioned um solely contained within the prominade in the rear. Um so it's all pedestrian areas and as we understand the definition of unoccupied open space the all pvious
area in that um section of the site would count towards that definition. Um and we are maintaining the coverage. So we're we're you know moving some sidewalks around and moving some landscape areas around but the net net uh we're maintaining coverage. So
existing proposed coverage is uh or excuse me existing and proposed unoccupied open space is 25.3%. Um it remains unchanged and the required minimum is 15%. So we're we're
um over that requirement. Could you also describe the proposed trees and shrubs and is that in compliance with the municipal ordinance? >> Yes. So looking at the area of the project on
the prominade, we calculated there was 5,445 square ft of unoccupied open space in the prominade and the adjacent um walkway that's included within the limit of disturbance of the project.
And within that area, the ordinance requires one tree and two shrubs per 250 square ft. So um with that area comes to 22 trees are
required and 44 shrubs are required and the proposal includes 29 trees and 140 shrubs. So meeting that requirement within the limit of the proposed project >> and uh
Mr. Carman will present that landscape plan to you. >> Can you describe the hours of operation? >> Yes. So this this is a residential community. So, it's essentially 24/7 if the residents want to go out, you know, for a midnight walk, um they're going to
do that cuz this this is, you know, analogologist to their backyard, the prominade area that is. So, it's a uh 24/7. Um and as I mentioned previously, the pavilion area is going to have uh
approximately 80 80 seats. Um and and you know the other amenities as well. Uh there will be lighting um pole and foot uh lighting um that you know that will be available for safety at the
residents um for their use of the property >> operating hours. So there's not gonna there there there's not a proposed restriction on that. So it's it's going to be, you know, essentially again up up to the residents
of how they utilize that amenity. >> You mentioned there'll be 247 access to the pavilion area and there'll be lighting there. And are there any >> throughout the as it is today? >> Sure. There's, if I may, there's 24-hour lighting now on the prominade because
the residents can go and walk on that today if they so choose. I've been advised by uh some of the operators there that there not a lot of people floating around that lake, but it is available if someone likes it. that would continue because that's part of
the uh what's g what is agreed to between the ten the resident and the owners and uh it's part of the amenity package. So the lighting there will be lighting on the deck and how is that lighting screen? I think you kind of
talked about that already. >> Yeah. So there there's both polemounted and and you know I'll I'll call it foot level lighting. the the foot level lighting is, you know, self-explanatory. Um, you know, it's down. It's mostly going to be um, you know, screened by
the plants to to a certain extent. The the polemounted lighting is LED uh, high efficiency lighting. Um, we are proposing decorative uh, marine themed uh, fixtures um, just to to go along
with the prominade area. um you know to to to keep that display of the prominade area the aesthetics and as I mentioned those are LED they're they're downward directed um so they're not you know they're not your your your
older type of fixture where there's a light bulb hanging out and then it's going to be you know coming out the sides the LEDs are up in the top and they're directed down um from those polemounted decorative lighting. Yeah, my question did pertain to lighting control and so the the downward answers
part of that because um the Redbank master plan had calls for a dark sky strategy and so does the downward lighting satisfy those requirements? >> Yes. >> Okay. And um are there any you said the lighting is already existing, right? And so could you tell me are there existing
controls for like um dimming or after certain hours or motion sensors where lights will be dim and then become brighter when residents walk by? So yes, there there will be the ability to control them. Um, currently some of
them are are are solar and they're motion activated. Um, but you know, as I mentioned, it's not um there's not going to be a hard requirement. It's going to be kind of at the feedback of the community as as kind
of that, you know, as I mentioned, this is kind of their backyard. So, how that how they want the lighting. Um, it'll it'll be tailored to the to the feedback from the community, but there will be an ability to to control based on that feedback. >> Okay. Thank you.
Now, with regard to the review letter, are there any other issues? >> You know, John, I don't think the mic's picking you up. Sorry. Oh, it is. Got it. All right. >> Hello. >> Sorry. Okay. This was hidden here. I didn't quite think I thought I was
speaking into it. Sorry. Um, are there any other uh in with regard to the review letters? Are there any other issues that you want to discuss with the board or can are you able to comply with the remaining requirements? >> So, uh, yes, we will be able to comply
with the remaining requirements of the March 12th letter from, um, TNM Associates. >> Have you made an application to Mammoth County Planning Board? >> Yes. >> Have you gotten a decision? >> Uh, yes. And, uh, an approval in the form of of a letter of no interest.
>> Likewise, have you applied to Pre Soils? >> Yes. And have you received a a certification from them? >> Yes. Site plan certification has been received. >> Both toals and county have already been applied for and approved. And do you have applications pending at NJ?
>> Yes. >> And they've gone through the initial review. >> I'm not sure about. >> Yes. >> Yes. The um what I'm calling the platform, you know, that extends beyond the building. this the size of that is going to change
or not change? >> No. So, it's Yeah, it's an existing bulkhead and it's going to be um replaced in kind um you know at the same location. >> What is the area south of the structure right in there?
All that going move your hand to the towards yourself >> here. >> No, no, within the line. What's all that? That's open platform. Um, so the I'm just going to go from the bulkhead to the property line. So
directly to the south of the bulkhead, Yeah. is is a wooden um pier. So piles and >> Oh, so that's not a platform structure. >> No. No. And and to to the Yeah. To the south of the bulkhead, this is actually um a conservation easement that's
proposed to remain as part of this project. It's not being >> It might be helpful if you just identify the ed the river's edge. >> Yeah. So, so the the river's edge is is approximately at the line of the northern extent of the pavilion. So, if you extend that down, that's
approximately the the water line >> approximately. >> So, any other questions from the board? Where is the Riverwalk easement on your on your drawing? >> Right. So that the easement
starts at uh Riverside Avenue. Uh it extends along the southerntherly property line following the property line and then it turns and is um I I believe it terminates in this area of of the conservation easement. So it
comes down and it provides access to this path um and and the conservation easement. Okay, any other questions from the board? >> Just another question about the floating pier. Um, how far out uh does it go
again and how does it compare to the properties to the west and east that have docks as well? So, if you just give me one second, I'm just going to take one measurement from the bulkhead um just to add that up and
then I'll I'll get give you an answer on So the the bulkhead isn't exactly square with the with the river, but it's approximately 300 ft from the bulkhead um to where the furthest point of the um
full build out the 20 slip uh uh docks will be >> and how does that compare to the properties on the east and the west? So, um, referring to A19. So, it's
approximately to the east. >> No, I meant the comparing to the marinas on the east of the property and the marina on the west. >> South. >> Use the other picture. >> Well, use the overall exhibit a
>> the next door neighbors. >> Right. Right. Yeah. I'm I'm I I I will answer that question. So you you can see from here this one is shown on this plan. It's going to be a little more accurate. So I'll give you this one and then I'll I'll look at the aerial. So uh
the proposed 300 ft compared to the to the marina that is directly to the south. The marina directly to the south is approximately 75 feet um less >> long. No less. So, so, so 300 ft is our
proposed. The one the one to the east is approximately 75 ft less. So, if you're measuring from the same point, that's that's approximately. >> So, you'll stick out a little bit further. The >> the proposed uh 20 slip will. Yes. >> Okay. And how do you compare on the
other side as well? >> Okay. So this is A17 the aerial exhibit and just bear with me for one minute. So to the west,
that's approximately 325 ft from from the existing bulkhead to the point furthest into the river. So comparable to the proposal, >> the adjoining uh the two uh boat docks
that the board member asked about, they actually do they start at the same point from the uh river's edge or are they closer? >> Yeah, I'm not sure it's directly comparable. I'm just going from the bulkhead because the the river is kind
of curving as you're as you're going east. So you're not really measuring from a a common line. So just you know the most common I think we can get is from the location of the bulkhead. Um so as I mentioned the proposal is
approximately 300 ft from the bulkhead. um to the south um that's approximately 225 ft and then to the north I excuse me to that was to the east to the east is approximately 225 ft and to the west is
approximately 325 ft and are there other um boat slips as well uh further uh to the left of your lot you know we see the two bulkheads currently or the two um uh docks with about 25 boats each. And
then further on past that, are there in fact more docks with more boats? Which one? That's the Molly pitcher, right? The Molly pitcher has um has boat slips, too. I mean, I'm trying to get a feel of the number of boat slips that we already
have in this small area of the Navas River, right? Because boats can't continue down the Nasync River much further because there's a lower bridge. And certainly a 40ft boat can't continue down in that direction. They have to come out of your slip and make a right past Maple Cove, right? And continue
down towards Rumson into um Sandy Hook area. Right. Shrewsbury River. >> Shberry. >> So I'm trying to get a feel how many boats we currently have there. You have any idea? I >> I do not currently. >> Okay.
Mr. Chairman, I have no other questions for Anthony if the board is finished. >> Any anybody else from the board? Anybody from the public have a question for this witness? I don't see any. We'll close that.
Get on to your next witness. Jack Corman, please. >> Next one. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good evening. If you could just uh state your name, please. >> Jack Carman. C A R M. >> Put the mic up to your mouth.
>> And do you uh view your business address, please? >> 92 Tallowwood Drive. T A L L O W O D Drive, Medford, New Jersey. >> And do you swear, if you could just raise your right hand, do you swear that the information and testimony you're about to provide will be the truth to
the best of your knowledge. So I help you, God. >> I do. >> Thank you. And you're testifying tonight in your capacity as a licensed >> landscape architect >> and your licenses and certifications are qual and qualifications are current, up to date and in good standing. >> It is. >> Thank you.
>> I'm offering Mr. Corman as an expert in uh landscape architecture. >> Can you give us a little background? >> Sure. Um been a landscape architect, graduated Rutgers Cook College in 1988. Uh so practicing landscape architecture
once I got my license 1990 and my area of specialization actually is in the design of therapeutic gardens in uh senior communities, dementia gardens, uh continue care, retirement communities, hospitals, so forth and so on.
>> Great. Thank you. >> All right, Jack. So you prepared the plans or under others under your direction? >> I have. Um, and in fact, uh, what is it? They said, deja vu all over again. So,
I had worked on the original garden 20 years ago. Now, with the work that needs to be done on the bulkhead, we're back revisiting the garden. Um, and like all things in life, things change, but the one thing that doesn't really change is the residents involvement and interest
in this garden. So the design of the garden really is a genesis of a lot of the ideas that were offered by the residents. Things change. We had a putting green. That's not anything that's of interest now, but the bottom line is, and it's Andrew said, this is
their backyard. So they know very well. The the caregivers, the staff there know what the residents are interested in. That's some of the reasons why we have the pavilion, more outdoor activities. They may do movie nights. Uh they're
very interested in gardening. There is an existing sculpture that's there. We're going to replic, take it out, put it back in. Uh residents had personally purch uh paid for uh a water feature that's going to be saved, put back in. There's
additional water features. Uh, I know one of the comments in the TNM letter was to try and introduce more native plant material. We can do that. Little bit difficult at times because again, this is their backyard. We're not looking to put in any plants that are invasive in any way. Um, but they like
to garden. So, they've asked for roses. They've asked for flowering trees. Um, hydrangeers are big. So, we try to accommodate that as best we can. um they were a little bit upset because some of the trees that they're fond of have to be taken out because of the work
that's being done, but we're going to try and uh work with them. We are working with them to try and put back those things that they they enjoy. So, it's kind of an overview of the the overall prominade. Andrew had talked about um John did that um socialization
is so important. So, fire pits, outdoor sitting areas, um pathways around, uh again, a lot of amenities that you may actually probably more than you would have in your average backyard.
>> So, there's a portion of the plants that are u native. >> Some of them are native. We have oak trees, basswood, um ornamental trees that are going in. Um, but again, it's a it's a balancing act. Um, but you know, we want to attract the birds and the
butterflies in there. That's all part of it. Some of the residents are birders. They enjoy watching the birds. Um, it's all part of their their home. >> So, it could you just give a little more description of the walking path that
you'll put in and what what the goal is to achieve with that? >> Sure. Um, again talking to the residents, gardening is one of the main activities that they enjoy doing. So you can see that through the pathways. This
is all a tinted concrete. It's important to tint the concrete so you don't have a bright glare. Uh, as an older as we all age, um, well, think of it this way. Coming out of a movie theater on a bright day, that bright white concrete is is hurtful to the eyes. So tinting
the concrete is very important. Um, you mentioned ADA accessibility. Um, there are no steps out here. Uh, seating, uh, 18 19 inch seat height, so it's comfortable to get in and out of. Shade is important. That's why the pavilion is
is a, uh, an important feature of the of the prominade garden. Um, artist renderings are wonderful. Uh, it looks like it might be a fall display right now, but it's not quite. Um, but we have a variety of larger shade trees, uh,
ornamental trees. Color is important, perennials that again that are going to attract, uh, hummingbirds, butterflies, other birds into the garden. You can see the fire pits. The end of the proomenade is really a a
prime gathering space because people like to sit and watch. You talked about the pontoon boat. People like to either be out on the water or enjoy looking at the water. Um so and again just a variety of opportunities for people to wander about
in the garden. >> Do you have a a picture of what it looks like now? I'm looking at one online. I'm not sure if it's accurate or not. >> I don't have an existing um Yeah, that's that's it. >> That's it. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> And I found that on the website for the
for the atrium. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Good marketing. >> That was your last design. >> That was the last design. Time for a change. >> You mentioned gardening can be very therapeutic for the residents. Are you going to have any vegetable gardens back there? >> There are. Thank you. There are um a
couple raised planters along this side. So whether the residents want to uh garden within those or again they may tuck in some plants here and there. Um herbs, there's a lot of herbs listed on there. So the culinary staff might be able to use those as well. Um the idea
is to really for the residents and for the staff to use the garden as much as possible. I can get into the research of uh reducing stress, lowering blood pressure, uh natural uh absorption of vitamin D, balance of circadian rhythms.
Those are all the important things that happen out here that we don't talk about but are important parts of life, our our overall well-being. And I'll shut up. And Jack, you you did a program where you spoke with groups groups of residents and came to this little flavor
of what they asked. >> I was there last week and we did talk to some of the residents about some of the other gardening activities. Um we'll be meeting with them again to show them the plan. But the idea was to get through the planning board, get approval, and then show the board uh show the
residents um next steps what we want to do. Any other questions for this witness? Any questions from the Come on up. Hold on. >> You know what? We're just going to swear you in. Come on up. And
>> you go. >> Okay. My name is Linda Cohen. I live at 28 Riverside Avenue and I look down on your garden, Jack. >> You know what? We're just going to swear you in. Linda, good evening and welcome. Do you swear that the information and testimony you're about to provide to the extent you provide any will be the truth to best of your knowledge to help you
God? >> Thank you. >> Do down on your garden since my apartment is literally on the top floor. >> Okay. >> And I'm able to look right down >> on the uh on the property. And I just want to say that the garden is quite
beautiful and um your 20-y year plan since I've watched it for the last 20 years has been beautiful. Um my only concern was that I was uh questioning about the boat traffic right in that little area there and um basing basing
it on how our uh dock is set up next to the dock here. But it looks to me like uh it goes out further than the dock at uh at the Naviscake I think. So it looks lovely and uh if you do as good a job on
this as you have. That's it. >> That's all I have to say. >> Thank you. That's a good impression. >> Can you send us a letter so Jack can get a raise? >> Thank you. >> Oh, thank you. >> Okay, any other questions from the
public? Close that part. Yeah. On to the next witness. >> Andrew Janu, our planner. >> Quick quick question. Oh, >> what's the dock entrance on the rendering? Is that it at the bottom? >> It would uh through here by the pavilion and then the boardwalk would come down
this way in the lower part. >> So, there's a boardwalk and then >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Andrew Jano. >> Good evening, Mr. Janu. If you could just state your raise your right hand
and state your name and address. >> It's Andrew Janu J A N IW 315 Highway 34 Colts Neck, New Jersey. >> And do you swear that the information and testimony you're about to provide will be the truth, the best your knowledge to help you God? >> I do. >> And you're testifying tonight in your capacity as a licensed
>> professional planner. >> And your licenses and certifications and uh qualifications are current and up to date and in good standing. >> They are. >> And I think the chairman is going to ask if you could just We have a lot of new board members. if you could just even though you've been here many times before uh just so the new board members could uh be familiar with your
background. >> Absolutely. Uh I'm a principal in the firm of Beacon Planning and Consulting Services have been for the last 28 years. I have a bachelor's and master's degree in civil engineering from the New Jersey Institute of Technology. I am a licensed professional planner in the state of New Jersey as well as a member
of the American Institute of Certified Planners. currently serving as the planner for freehold burrow here in Mammoth County for the burrow of Carterette, the township of Livingston and redevelopment uh planner for South Amboy and Bayon. Uh in 2022, I was appointed to the state board of
professional planners by Governor Murphy and I've testified throughout the state of New Jersey as a planner. >> Great. Thank you. >> I'm offer Mr. Daniel as an expert in planning. >> We'll accept them. Thank you, >> Annie. Mr. Daniel, we asked you to review this application and be here to provide testimony in support of the
requested variances in the site plan. >> Absolutely. So, in preparation for this application, I've visited the site. I've reviewed the uh review letters from TNM as well as your ordinance, your master plan, and some of the history uh related to this site. Um, as the mentioned and
I'll try not to be too repetitive. Uh, the property is within the waterfront development uh, zone which permits single family homes, multif family dwellings, professional offices. Uh, the atrium at Navasync Harbor is an age and place facility which provides independent living assisted living and
skilled nursing care uh, within a variety of agent place units. Uh, the use and structure are pre-existing non-conforming uses which were approved by varants uh, from by the Redbank zoning board. Uh the marina is a conditionally permitted use in the zone and as was testified meets all the
conditions associated with the use. So tonight's focus uh from a planning perspective are on the expansion of the pre-existing non-conforming use which would require a D2 variance as well as the three uh bulk variances that are
associated with that expansion. As was mentioned, the prominade is existing and what's being sought to do this evening is to do a reconfiguration of that prominade to include a roofed uh pavilion which with open air sides. Uh that'll provide for uh covered seating,
covered dining areas for approximately 80 residents uh at at maximum capacity. Uh there will be a reconfiguration of the walking paths of the gardens in there. Um and and I'll get to it a little bit more, but uh the uh pavilion
will have a roof that's greater than 500 square feet, which would requires us to treat that as a principal structure, not as an amenity or accessory structure. So that's what triggers the variance relief related to the coverage uh as well as
the setbacks. Uh as we mentioned, we're going to modify some of these amenities. I think that was explained uh in detail by our our landscape architect and our engineer. So, specifically, we are seeking the D2 variance for an expansion of a non-conforming use. We're seeking a
parking variance for 162 spaces provided where 168 are required and this is uh triggered by the addition of full buildout of the marina. However, the 162 spaces are existing and those marina spaces as was testified will be for the
exclusive use of the residence. With respect to the flood hazard area, uh the pavilion is within a flood hazard area. Uh your ordinance requires a 35 ft setback for principal building to the flood hazard area because we're in that we are a zero condition. And finally
with respect to lot coverage uh 35% is permitted and that this is essentially building coverage uh where 38.1 exists and 40.7 is proposed that differential is essentially the roof on the pavilion. Um but that pavilion is currently a
concrete structure. So essentially we're putting a roof over a concrete structure. Uh we're not increasing overall impervious. As a matter of fact, uh, in speaking with the landscape architect, we're actually reducing overall impervious from approximately 73% to 70% because of the
reconfiguration of the gardens. So, while we have more roof area essentially, we'll have less impervious area. Um, as I had mentioned, this is a age in place facility and some of the things that we're trying to do are really looking to take advantage of the very
unique situation of having such a facility on a waterfront. Um, it's a rarity. Um, and the residents there recognize the benefit of being in such an area and are asking to have uh amenities that are enhanced by the
quality of life that can be had on a waterfront. These include more time, more socialization along the riverfront, having a a covered area where they're not constantly seeking shade or having sitting areas, fire pits for socialization. Uh, and of course, the marina is uh something not only that
they've expressed an interest in, but I think uh from a marketing perspective for an agent place facility uh is certainly going to attract um citizens who either like to vote or have voted and looking for places to. So once again, it's it's a very unique
situation. It's a unique location. Um and it's something that we're looking to enhance uh in terms of the quality of life for the residents there. Um the the essentially the prominade is to the rear or riverfront of the building. The amenity space was last updated as
was mentioned approximately 20 years ago. Um, and as the residents talk and and comment, they, you know, they they seek new ways for social interaction, new modern amenities such as fire pits, which probably weren't even heard of at the time. U, so we are looking
essentially to um address these concerns and to make this something that's uh very current and and livable for the residents and for future residents. Um uh in preparing for this evening, um not only did I look at your ordinances, but I've looked at your master plan. Your
master plan is actually uh very much on point with what we're proposing to do. Uh on page 100 of the master plan, uh in terms of strategies and recommendations, uh one of the uh strategies is to provide a diverse range of housing options across income, household size,
and age groups. Then the section specifically has the following language and and I'll quote diverse housing options in terms of price ranges, number of bedrooms, services, and amenities for all age groups and those with special needs uh meet an essential need of the
community. This range of options also helps enable existing residents to remain in Redbank as they graduate through the various phases of life without being priced out. Maintaining a housing stock that can serve a broad spectrum of community helps to ensure that living in the burrow is attainable for those who are just starting out as
well as seniors who have raised their families and seek to maintain residence in Redbank. We're on point with that. Uh this is a waterfront senior community. You can age and place in here from independent living to assisted care to full uh skilled care. uh it it can
provide and does provide waterfront views, waterfront activities, and we're hoping to enhance the waterfront activities that will be provided as part of this. Uh it is quite frankly a very unique situation to provide um an enhanced agent place facility that takes
advantage of its very unique location. Uh we also have to look at the municipal land use. As this board knows, variances aren't granted for the sole benefit of an applicant. There has to be some public purpose. Uh the municipal land use law outlines 16 purposes of zoning
which are the public purposes associated with variance relief. Uh A is to encourage and there are four I believe apply here. A is to encourage municipal action to guide the appropriate use of all lands in a state in a manner which promote the public health, safety,
morals and general welfare. Uh the use that's there today when it was granted the variance was uh recognized as an inherently beneficial use. uh and in repeated so much in your in application number Z9023
in 2010 uh the resolution related to that Z210-15 reference the Jbar case and the resolution cited that providing housing for senior citizens is an important public interest inherently beneficial uses uh which I'll discuss a little bit
later in detail are recognized as universally of value to the community because they fundamentally y service serve the public good and promote the general welfare. In this instance, uh we have a use on the property that was recognized by this board as an
inherently beneficial use and we're seeking to enhance the experience of the residents of that use through the expansion of prominade amenities uh with a covered pavilion outdoor activities um and something that would benefit from
those that are active right down to those that are experiencing mobility issues. It'll be ADA uh compliant. It'll have waterfront access for people that are uh wheelchair bound. Uh so when we look at an inherently beneficial use and how to enhance the quality of life for
the seniors, I think we're absolutely on point with that. Uh having said that, a due to variance relates to the specific uh nature of the variance relief we're seeking, which is related to uh essentially the expansion of a non-conforming use by means of the
pavilion. the pavilion because it's more than 500 square f feet is a principal structure. Um, and that would be read in terms of devariance leave as an intensification of the use even though we're not really changing the intensity of occupancy, the number of bedrooms,
the number of cars introduced to the site that will all remain the same. Uh but we do have to look and one of the uh quite frankly uh special reasons when we look at a D2 variance is promoting a an environment that's on point with the
neighborhood that's visually attractive and we're on point with that. I within the MLU well is to promote a desirable visual environment through creative development techniques and good civil design and arrangement. The prominade will enhance uh plantings, garden areas and amenities, soften its appearance and
the uh the entirety of that will be very much in keeping with the surroundings with the Riverview Towers which I believe are to our west and then that we talked about further uh with Molly Pitcher. They have pavilions the river uh Riverview Towers I believe has a pool
and a pavilion directly on the pavilion next to ours. Uh there are marinas there. Uh these are all uh integral to the waterfront experience in Redbank and and I think it's very much in keeping with the environment and what's common in these areas.
>> Excuse me. Can I ask you a quick can I ask you a question? >> Uh when you're testifying and you're talking about the master plan and and all these amenities. Are you also are you talking about just the prominade area or are you talking about also the 20 boat slips? >> Uh I'm talking just about the prominade. Just the >> prominade the the D2 variance is related to the prominade.
>> Okay. >> Yeah. The bokel slips are conditionally permitted and we meet all the conditions. Um L is to encourage senior citizen community housing construction. This obviously is a senior community with an age in place uh type of operation.
That's certainly beneficial to the uh the community and in fact what's happening here is now a reinvestment to modernize the amenities and to uh create socialization and amenities to meet current needs of the residents. And finally, M is to encourage the
coordination of various public and private procedures and activities shaping land development with a view of lessening the cost of such development and to the more efficient use of land. So we have a prominade that's existing there today. We're not expanding the prominade. We're not making it larger.
Uh the prominade uh issue that's triggering the variance relief this evening is the pavilion that will be uh have a roof over it to provide shade for the residents. it'll be open air that that essentially creates the expansion of the non-conforming use. Uh
I would add that because that prominade's there and the sole thing that we're doing that triggers this variance is adding a roof to a structure over a concrete debt deck existing. Certainly that's it's an it's an amenity that's there um and it's on point with M
where we're to taking something that's cost effective, costefficient and improving the quality of life for the citizens in that building. Um so I had mentioned inherently beneficial use in terms of what this building was found to be. Um a building that's inherently
beneficial uh naturally satisfied the positive criteria for the much more stringent D1 variance. Um and these are uses that are considered to be valuable to the community because they fundamentally serve the public good and promote the general welfare. We're here tonight though for a D2 variance for an
expansion of that use and the criteria changes a little bit. The D2 criteria uh essentially focuses on the relief that's sought for what's viewed as the intensification of the use. What's what's triggering the intensification?
In this case, it's the changes to the to changes to the prominade through the addition of a pavilion. So, when we look at the D2 relief, the standards turned to Coventry Square and Town Center V. Randall and essentially those basically the use is permitted. Um, are you doing
something that's consistent with your neighborhood character? Does it enhance the visual aspects of it? Is it something that makes it a little bit more compliant than the variance relief that was granted for the D1? And then finally the focus shifts then to the accommodation of the site for the
intensification of the use and is it does it meet the two negative uh criteria in terms of is it something that's done without detriment to the neighborhood or to the community and is it something that's not detrimental to your zone plan or master plan. So when
we look at the impact of the roof cover uh over the over the prominade essentially what we're saying is is that creating something that uh creates a negative view uh from the riverfront because that's you only see it from the riverfront you don't see it from the
street front. Um is it something that intensifies the use of the building or the non-conforming use? No, it doesn't. I mean it's for the residents. It enhances their quality of life. that enhances their socialization. Um, but it's not something that's going to create new traffic, new trash, new
noise. It's an existing facility. Uh, it has the prominade. We're enhancing the prominade through some additional structures that are are to the benefit of the residents that are already there. When we look at the negative criteria, um, are we doing something here that the
site can't accommodate? Are we creating additional drainage? Are we creating any additional problems with this? Um, we're actually reducing the overall impervious coverage. While we're increasing building coverage, we're reducing the overall coverage of the site. Uh, we're not creating anything that's going to to
be a negative impact upon the neighbors. As a matter of fact, was happy the neighbor spoke before I got up to say, I love what you did. Hope you keep doing it. Um, and when we look at your zone plan and your master plan, your master plan encourages this. It recognizes the
provision of all levels of housing uh with an effort to keep people within Redbank. Redbank is a river forward community. Uh this winter, never seen so many people show up for ice boating in my lifetime. Uh it's fantastic and this is something that will take advantage of
that. Uh so I think it's on point with what your master plan seeks to promote in terms of keeping people within Redbank and providing opportunities for senior housing. Uh so when we look at the D2 variance, I certainly think that can be granted without detriment to the public good or to the zone plan and
master plan. That takes us to the C variances. Uh there are three C variances and C variances are adjudicated under one of two terms. There's the C1 or the hardship variance which is a result of an a unique situation, a unique shape and
topographic conditions or a pre-existing condition that we can't do anything to cure. I think that's appropriate way to judge the uh fact that we are within a flood hazard area. We can't change that. Uh we can't provide a 35- ft setback from a
flood hazard area. The the entire prominade is in that area. What we're adding is a a rooftop pavilion. Um I don't think it's going to create any issues in terms of the flood hazard area. I mean, the the pavilion's been there. It's been enjoyed by the residents uh in its current
configuration for the last 20 years. And certainly what we're doing is not going to create any additional issues with respect to that. Uh however, we can reconcile all three of the bulk variances also under the C2 criteria. And the C2 criteria is what's known as traditional balance test. Uh under the
burdens of a balance test, uh there are three prongs of the positive criteria which are that the application must relate to a specific piece of property and it does that the purposes of the admissible land use law would be enhanced by a deviation from the zoning ordinance. And I read four purposes
which I think we do uh advance with this application. And finally that the benefits of the application outweigh any veteran. Um clearly the benefits of the application are to enhance the lifestyle of a senior community. That includes assisted living care and and full care
uh units and providing those residents access to the waterfront to sunshine to gardens and to those types of amenities which again are unique to this location because it is riverfront. uh we also have to reconcile the two negative prongs which are that the variance can be granted without substantial detriment
to the public good and I don't think anything that we're proposing here is a substantial detriment. Uh we're creating something I think that'll be more visually attractive. The designs of our landscape architect have been wellreceived over the years and I think he's done an outstanding job in creating a very receptive uh area both for small
seating groups and larger socialization uh within the prominade. And then we look at whether this will substantially impair the intent and purpose of the zone plan. Again, it's my opinion that this is on point with the intent of your zone plan to provide a variety of housing for citizens and to create opportunities for people to
remain in Redbank u as they age through. So when we look at this uh the three uh variances that we're seeking, the first is for parking. Uh we have 162 spaces. The marina triggers an increase to 168 spaces. Again, we're not opening the
marina to the public. These are these will be only offered to residents of it. Uh that's not going to create any additional traffic or burdens on parking. So I would think that's a dimminimous uh impact upon parking and the 162 spaces that currently operates
with will uh would remain in and that would condition would remain unchanged with respect to the setback of the uh flood hazard area. 35 ft required where zero is proposed. Again that entire prominade is within the flood hazard area. There's nothing we can do to change that and the prominad's already
used as a socialization area. We're just looking to enhance uh that and to make it more attractive for the residents. And finally, with respect to lot coverage, we talked about the roof uh taking the lock coverage from 38.1 to 40.7. However, there's a 3% reduction
overall coverage. So the roof over the concrete basically essentially changes the category from imperous to building coverage while overall impervious is being reduced by the enhanced gardens. So when we look at that on balance, I think it's a it's a better alternative
and we're creating a benefit in reducing the overall impervious coverage on the site. So when we look at those three bulk variances, I think on balance they can be granted. Uh it is a better zoning alternative. Uh and I think it'll be wonderful for the residents of the community.
Okay. >> Any questions from the board? >> Yes. >> Thank you. I I think you clarified this, but I just want to be sure I understand. So, the variances being requested have
to do with the parking and the pavilion. The boat slips are >> there conditional use. We meet all the conditions. >> So, boat slips can be construct constructed irrespective of how we vote on the variances. That's okay. So, they have nothing to do with what we're voting on. That's correct. Okay.
>> That you I I thought we said the boat slips generated the requirement for the parking variance. >> Well, the parking the parking variance it the boat slips if they were available to the public would generate the park. Our argument is we're creating boat slips, but we're not opening to the
public. They're only going to be open to people that already reside there. So, and that's not a condition of the boat slips. That's an independent bulk variance um related to the community. The boat slips are permitted. They meet all the criteria. I think it's six points of the
conditional use criteria. None of them related to parking. Uh what triggers the parking variance is the boat slips. You're not voting on the boat slips. You're voting on whether the applicant needs to provide more parking if those boat slips are constructed.
Well, the plan is I I'm confused more now because Yeah. I'm You're confusing me. >> Annie, perhaps you could. >> Yes. >> Correct. >> Right. So, if if you weren't going to
put the boats back the 20 boats back there, you wouldn't need a variance for the parking. Am I right? >> That's correct. >> Okay. >> So, when you say that you meet all the conditions, what does that mean? So yeah, let me just uh So let me go
through the conditions. I thought the engineer kind of went through the conditions, but I can do that again. Um >> what do you what do you need? >> All right. I mean, I I I think I get it. Um >> yes, >> but for the 20 slips, you wouldn't need the parking variance, right? I mean,
that's basically what >> correct. That's correct. That's correct. Okay. >> The boat slips are limited to the people who are already there. >> Yeah. Yeah. I mean, do we >> attracting more parking requirement? >> Well, do you think people who have boats invite their friends on boats? You have a 40 foot boat. You don't not going out
by yourself. Are you going to have guests? Is that I mean, is it fair to say that they're going to have guests on their boat? >> The facility operates today with those same people and guest parking. >> Yeah. I think I don't think it's unfair to say that it's going to generate more guests by the fact that you have a 40ft
boat in the backyard, right? you get more friend. I don't know what the old saying is, but you get a lot of new friends when you get a boat. It's like a lot of people like to be passengers on a boat, but not on a boat. And I'm one of those people personally. >> So, um, you know, I was just trying to clarify.
>> You live in town, so you can walk there. You don't need >> Well, you know, it's funny because I do and I've and I've launched from Maple Cove, you know, on my paddle board several, you know, and I go left, you know, when you come out of Are you familiar with Maple Cove? Yeah. So, I launch there and there's a lot of traffic, you know, and I have to go left
because the boat traffic can't go under that bridge there. Can't go under under uh is that Gver's Bridge. So, and there's a lot of us that do that. Kayaks, families with kayaks, little kids, stand up paddle boards. And then you also have the the sailboats that are
mored directly out front there. So, that's what I'm more concerned about. I look the the the arch the landscaping is beautiful. I mean, it's it's beautiful. So, I really have a concern about traffic, boat traffic. Uh, also the um
your guests, you know, I think guests will increase greatly, quite frankly. Um, that's just my opinion. You put 20 very nice boats back there. I think you're going to have a lot of people back there with a beautiful pavilion and food and fire pits and all these things. I think it's going to be more popular than I think we're alluding to
personally. Um but I'm sorry to to stop you there. So please >> if I may. >> Yeah. >> The uh approval for the docs is primarily rest with the NJ DP. Those applications are submitted and we
anticipate approval based on the status of that application right now. So that's uh something that the D would manage if they thought that the boats were not safe. >> Yeah. I' I'd actually be surprised that
they would allow that. Um, knowing that the channel there is so narrow and that's sticking out that much farther than all the other marinas. I'd really be shocked that they they allow that >> that there also this particular series
of docks is set further from the near front. >> I've I've been over that area I don't know how many hundreds of times. Uh, so I'm pretty familiar with it. If >> you weren't in a kayak, you probably couldn't get there, right? >> You'd be shocked that they out 75 ft
beyond what do >> one of the things that our client has asked is that that dock can be built in phases. So they want to if it doesn't if there's not a demand I think it would stop at six.
>> You have four there'll be four more. Sure. >> So, we did a review a few months back with the core of engineers and NJD and we specifically went over the river and where the channel ends. It actually ends
on the docks at the neighboring property and it doesn't come into effect at all with our property. So, they had no concern over that. have a couple of questions. I don't know who to direct it to specifically. So, anybody who knows the answer, please
stand up. Um, we just have a section uh you submitted an EIS. Um, is that a callers uh report? Can you um
item 7.5 on page eight of our report, can you talk about the public access and the deed restrictions? You've described that there's an existing public access from the roadway uh towards the southern part of the
property. Is that right? >> Yes. So the existing public access starts at Riverside Avenue uh traverses parallel with the southerntherly property line and then comes into the
conservation uh easement um that is east of the prominant. >> Okay. And and I'll get back to that public access in a second, but are you changing anything with a conservation easement at all? Is anything being >> No, we're we're not we're not proposing
any disturbance in the conservation easement. >> Okay. So, is the public access sign is there signage required at all by the state? Like how do people know that they can publicly go back there? That's what the burrow was.
>> Isn't that the That's the burrow uh easement that uh at one of the prior applications we granted. >> Feeling that's the D waterfront development public access that was probably required back in 2010 maybe.
>> Well, this is the ri that's the riverwalk too that that this this property has already granted an easement for the riverwalk. But the riverwalk easement is usually along the river along the river. You're
you have public access from the road, existing public access from the road. Um >> I think Jackie, so um Kevin and I actually were going through this today. Um,
back in 2010, this board had agreed that if the easement could not go along the waterfront, the applicant had to find an
alternate route um for the access easement even though it wasn't touching the water. So, I'll I'll bring it up. It's it it was written weird. Kevin, I guess my my just my
question and maybe the landscape architect who was here before, I don't know if that should if it's public access. Should there be signage that tells the public that they can access the water if it's public access? I I've just
because from the pictures it looks like it's just part of your development and it's not something that you would grant public access to. Does that make sense? And I don't know if the I just wanted to point that out to the board. Is that something
that the public should be able to access? Well, the easement that was requested at the prior approval for Riverwalk was granted, issued and filed and recorded, accepted by the bureau.
It's now in place. >> So then yes, >> so public can access >> public can access it. But I understood throughout the time of the riverwalk access or riverwalk issue that there was
a recognition that the riverwalk would have to be somewhat connected and completed in order to be really effective for the public. And part of the whole situation, as I understood it, was an attempt over the years to to
gather these to to um require applicants to to uh give away the land for the ease for the access to the burrow. When our client was that proposed to our client, we met that standard. I think I don't think there's anything
>> left for us to do on that. >> Asking if it should be signed. Do you understand what I'm saying? That there's there's an there's a sidewalk that goes from the street and it's public access to the back. Are you allowing the I'm assuming public can
then >> walk in there? >> There's no Yeah, someone can do that because they have the rights under the easement, but we don't have a sign out there saying walk back here because you have no place to go. You'll turn around. You have to turn around and go back. I don't know if
I don't know if that's the >> you're basically saying in the in the spirit of public access, does access really mean access if the public doesn't know they have access >> and and and so I think the question is
when you negotiated the easement with presumably the burrow if the burrow I mean number one 10 years ago if the burrow required the signage it's probably in there. Um, and I just don't know if it if it is in there. I just I haven't seen that documentation. >> I would have to refresh the on the
easement, but all of the river all of the Riverwalk easements are contingent upon the riverwalk being completed. At this point, our clients were one of the first ones that came in during that ordinance and granted what was requested. >> So, the the
>> we don't really want to I don't see a real need today to uh invite the public to walk there and have to turn around and walk back. I mean, there's no place for him to go except in basically the 170 residents backyard.
>> Well, actually, um, the atrium does use their pontoon boat. They launched from the from that area. >> They pull up, >> right? People go to the conservatory and they walk in. So the public could if they want if they knew they could say, "Hey, I'll you know if if my friend had
a boat at Irwin, not Irwin, but if they had a boat in Rumson or somewhere and they wanted to pick me up, I could walk to the atrium. I could walk down the easement and wait there and he could pull in and pick me up if I so wanted." >> Now whether to stay in the burrow's
property, >> right? as long as I fit down there and as long I guess it as the atrium pontoon is not picking up and dropping off their passengers because that they do as a matter of routine now also. So there will be some congestion there I guess >> because any in any boating arrangement
you can only put one boat in a squad at any one time. So right >> you have to sort of wait. >> Yeah. Um, so I understand your point. If the public knew about it, would it be used more perhaps, you know, >> and I think his point is it's only there
once we have connected all the waterfronts. So, >> yeah, >> potato kind of like and >> well, all I'm saying is there is more to it than just walking down there and turning around res. That's what can happen. >> Yeah. But that was never part of what
was asked when this was it was we're building our goal is over and I just had this happen for the hospital uh at the planning board. They're at the far end. You can't get to there because of Irwin, but they wanted the the easement anyway.
So I said, "Well, you know, you got a hospital beds right next to it." So they agreed that Burrow agreed to additional restrictions if you will in terms of noise and sound and that they wouldn't have bands there and so forth because it's the hospital uh bedrooms are right
hospital rooms are right next to the uh where the easement would be. In fact, it comes it's going to be uh it's they wanted it to be a few it's going to be a few feet less because that's all the land that was there before it got to the building. >> And we say that um if the 2010
uh agreement required to sign that they put up a sign if >> yeah I mean I'm I'm thinking and let's just assume for purposes of this discussion that the application is going to be approved. I don't know what it is. Let's just assume. I think uh John Juno, you're saying that I mean one of the
requirements of the condition of approval would be in accordance with that uh ordinance uh that you you would provide the conservation easement per the ordinance. And you're saying it's already done. Period. End of story. And we would just say give us proof that it's done but recorded. Well, I I'll
happily submit it to the board, but you have it on your files. >> And and I think that to your point, if it's required, um I mean, we're going to have to make sure it complies with the ordinance and we'll just I mean, that's the easy way to do it, I think. >> Well, it was submitted, reviewed, and
accepted. It wasn't just like we just filed something. It was >> an agreed agreed upon form that was issued at the time. >> No, I'm aware of that. I'm just trying to >> and I can tell you that the form that >> was done over has changed over the years multiple times. >> No, I'm just trying to close out the
issue by saying they put up a sign if the original thing asked for a sign, but if it doesn't, the hospital doesn't have to put up a sign. >> And then John, we also at the zoning board because we normally Shauna would not deal with hospital applications, but
we did last year with the the building that had the tunnel through it sort of where you could see through the in that was demolished. And that so that was technically a waterfront property that the hospital owned and we gave them approval to use it as a temporary parking.
>> No, it's a permanent parking >> permanent parking area. But that was we had that discussion about the easement too and that was a condition. >> Well, that was the the last application was for that for that particular area because it was a replacement of a generator and a new uh oxygen tank.
>> I think that might have been the planning. >> Yeah, there the hospital had three applications last year. Um, it was for solar panel, the generator, and for the parking lot. >> And that was all part of that y >> that application.
>> Sorry, can I just ask one more question? I swear this is the last one. Um, you currently have it's a series of questions, but there's you currently have four slips there now. >> They have an approval for four, >> but four were approved. No,
>> but we have not they have not been built. >> Okay. So, none have been approved, right? And the 20 triggers the six car variance. >> So, >> so if you had less than 20, let's say, it would >> Yes,
>> it would remove perhaps the requirement for the variance. >> We're required to have 158 spaces for the >> Yes. >> Oh, sorry. I'm sorry. >> The parking requirement for the configuration of the building is 158. we have 162 spaces. So we have four spaces
more. Uh so those four extra spaces would essentially be sufficient for eight boat slips. >> Eight boat slips. And you wouldn't need the a variance for parking. >> We wouldn't need a variance for parking. Okay. >> The variance is triggered by the >> the additional Okay. Thank you.
>> If I could follow up. >> Yes. But we the we're requesting our application is not seeking that to be open to the public. those are for people that are already residents and they're already in the count already in the parking calculation.
>> So the argument that was presented is that this marina is not attracting third party uh um users. It's people who are member uh residents and their guests could use it
>> just like residents and their guests today can they can visit they can have a meal they can >> no >> go out to the patio that's there. >> Yeah. And I would add the parking standard for the for the units themselves the 158 is consistent with
the Resa standards. the Reese's standards have visitor parking built into them because quite frankly senior centers, assisted living, the skilled, they don't have a lot of demand other than visitors. Uh, you know, people in the assisted living and skilled care
units typically don't drive. Um, so that 158 already builds into it pursuant to the Reese's calculations, uh, visitor parking. >> Got it. Are all your parking spaces occupied? >> Would you say on a regular or is it you
have a few? >> When I visited the site, it wasn't. But uh from an operations, are all your spaces typically occupied? >> No, all the spaces are not occupied. >> Who? This is Mike.
Tell them your name so they know who's speaking on. >> Michael Lursio. >> Okay. >> Yeah. the s significant portion of the spots are not occupied and as somebody mentioned when you have al memory care skilled nursing those residents don't have vehicles
>> and I'd also like to point out the facility has valet parking as a security valet guy at the front desk I don't know if it's all day but it's certainly in the evening he's there yeah >> correct >> to handle cars so I've yes >> had a friend there and I parked there regularly
Mhm. May I ask a point of clarification? Go ahead, Jane. >> The if the if this variance is is granted, it u the variance belongs to like the property, right? Not necessarily the owners of the property right now.
>> And because okay, I'm just want to ask for that clarification because I think a lot of the um criteria we're talking about where you know the parking is it's not used as a commercial marina right now. it's uh for residents and their guest right now um pertains to the current property but not necessarily the
next property owner right >> and and that's an excellent question and if I could address that and then Mr. junka you could respond to. So again, just assume that the application is being approved. If it is approved, and I don't know that it is, but if it is
approved, I think um any variance that you grant runs with the land, so it doesn't matter if they're sold to another company, but uh they would have to comply with the terms and conditions. And I think if this application were
approved, you would put in there certain conditions that it's not a public restaurant, it's not a public marina, it's not. And you'd put all those things in there so that you would narrow the parameters of what they're allowed to do so that the next operator that comes in
is bound by those still same conditions. >> Thank you, Dean. >> Good. Good. Okay. You done? I'm done. >> Any other questions from the board? Any questions from the public? Close that
part. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Chairman. I I would like to uh ask the board to approve this application. I know you're surprised by that, but the fact of the matter is that what we tried to do is to address all the issues that
were raised by your board engineer and to respond to the uh aspects of application. I think we meet and exceed all of the standards that would be applicable. I think that what's happened here is that our client uh has a uh
design and they've uh worked very hard to make it something that would continue to make this a premier uh facility for its uh its customer base so to speak. there's a uh multiple demands throughout
the uh u the system for uh the occupants and we have to I think the board has to take into account that these are not um uh act super active people they're more relaxed and uh hopefully we'll all get
there at some point in any event from purposes of a a zoning and planning application this application had sever the the use variance was identified. It was previously granted. This board has already acknowledged in the that this
was an inherently beneficial use. That kind of satisfies most of the use requirement. The second part was an expansion of the use and I think we've demonstrated quite well that the facility itself in terms of occupancy and um um services is exactly the same
that was granted that this is a modification to a amenity or recreation area for the residents that's already in use but not developed to its full capacity. This is a plan to enhance that to make it a benefit more of a benefit
for the uh residents and for their guests as they arrive. We have never I can advise the board that I have never been involved with an issue for this site with parking and that's rare for Redbank. Usually parking is a significant issue in the commercial
area. However, I think that then during the testimony that was presented that came out with the expect understanding that there were so many age related uh residents that they aren't all driving today and only a few of them have three or four cars and that's a joke of course
but the bottom line is I think that what's happened with our testimony is that this application has addressed each and every condition before the board in terms of the variances the use variances we've met those standards for the bulk variances is I think they're beneficial and that's been demonstrated by not just
our planner but by landscape architect and our engineer. I this very coordinated plan our client uh basically wanted this to continue to be the top and premier facility of this nature in in our in our county and that's what
this is intended to do is to keep it in that standard. I'm going to ask the board to approve it. It is a use variance. We need five affirmative votes. I think we've met all of the standards with testimony and with the presentation of exhibits. So, I'm going to ask the
board to vote in favor of the application. Of course, that's my job. Okay. >> Jackie, you have have any comments any issues with? >> I I think the variance for the parking they could eliminate if they wanted to
reduce the number of boat slips. That's adoption. Um, so there's a possibility there. Um, everything else was addressed in our letter um through testimony and they've agreed to revise your plans. >> They've agreed to. Okay. Any any other
comments from the board? >> I just have a question. Um, I know that you're waiting for the permit from the the D, but you say you're confident that you're going to get that. I mean, how does this work if we vote and then the permit? like I'm I'm curious about that
how that works. >> Excellent question if if I may, Mr. Chairman. So typically what well not typically what we pretty much always do is on any approval uh we say it's conditioned on getting all
outside approvals whether it's county planning board free of soil conservation D whoever and then we typically have in there a concept for this very reason that if the nature of the application materially changes or the nature of the
relief materially changes as a result of those outside approvals, you need to come back. Uh like for instance, like they said they were doing something that said and all the driveways going to I mean all the traffic is going to come in off this road and go out this road and then the county planning would change
that. That's not the approval that we not the plan that we approved. So we would make them come back. John, I think you would understand and agree with that. I do but as um we already have county approval. We have the soil conservation approval and our NJD
application has been moved from review to or from review to action. So it's I expect it to be approved as presented. If it isn't, we'll have we'll of course agree to come back. >> Any other comments? >> Yeah, I want to pick up on what Jackie
said. So if they're Yeah. If we if we separate out the variance for the parking, you could add the You could add eight boat slips now. Is that right?
>> You know what? I'm having a hard time hearing you. I apologize. You could add eight boat slips now because you have the parking spaces, right? >> Four. >> You have four parking spaces for >> or slips. Or boats. >> Or boat slips. Okay.
>> No, >> no, no. We can >> I'm sorry. Yeah, we we have sufficient park. It's 0.5 per slip. So, we can add eight without a parking variant. the we what what was presented was four would be phase one and then the balance 16
would be phase two and that's the way it was presented D in terms of phasing the construction of the slips. So, I'm just wondering per Jackie's comment if we we could split out these applications. One for the pavilion for those two variances
and one for the parking spaces because I'm kind of torn whether to vote yes on the parking spaces. I mean, I think you're asking uh and I I appreciate for to basically bifurcate the application per se. Now, that's not
how it was been presented. So, I think maybe have some more comments along what you're concerned. No, no, I think it's it's a totally fair question and comment and I think uh the applicants team is going to hear what people are saying and then maybe they're going to
propose it. >> Yeah. I would Isn't there a way around it if we couldn't one of us make a motion to approve it subject to there only being eight slips which would not trigger parking barriers? Um, >> I would ask that if you're going to do
that, well, if you make that motion, I'm going to ask the board not to act on it. Okay. >> We'll conduct a parking utilization study and show you how many extra spaces are available because even though there was testimony to it, there was no traffic report that said on a typical
day we only have 60 spa spaces. >> Well, if that's what you want to do, you can do that. I was just trying to make it easy. I think that we've met met the standards and I I to prove it but if if if that's a condition that's how we can address it and I don't want
to I don't want to see a denial. Well, I can see the improvements would be very beneficial to the community and I can't really see any detriments um to the community except I'm do I am hearing some concern over I guess the
size of the dock. So if anybody on the board has comments about that, I would love to hear thoughts or opinions on the size of the dock or anything like that. Like I said, I just it seems to it's out
75 feet farther than the dock closest to it, which I'll be honest with you is is pretty far reach out in there. That's my only concern. Am I going to reject it because of that? Um, not sure. Is that's
a concern. >> Vince, I don't Do you need me to answer that question? because I obviously raised my concerns about that. So, I don't think you need my comment on that. >> I would say share the concern about um that how far it sticks out and the boat traffic and how that affects small
vessels. And um I think what I'm thinking through right now is uh I think there's legitimate argument that this property owner does underutilize their parking. And so I don't know that denying the um parking hardship as a
proxy for the um dock is is something I would consider. >> I would also comment that given the parking variances that I've been witnessed to the last year or two, uh this is probably the smallest one I've seen. You know, six out of 168, six of
162. I mean, we've given much larger parking variances. This is very small my opinion. >> So, >> so I guess uh John, you've you've heard the the comments of the board members
and um it's up to you unfortunately. Do you want us to take a vote now on the application that's presented? Do you want to take a minute and consider modifying the proposal or do you want to take a time out and come back at a time
so you can do more uh research and study on on the um on that on that issue? >> Parking utilization. >> Let me speak with my client. >> Should we just um take a five minute break or or do you want I mean do you need a break or no?
Okay. break. >> All right. Take a five minute break. >> Okay. >> Had an opportunity to speak with your attorney and uh I think he wants to address the board. >> Okay. So, what I was told was the
applicant is proposing uh to basically uh in conjunction with what you were saying uh Gene is to basically ask for approval tonight. um with the understanding or the condition that it would be an eight slip boat uh eight
slip dock. um with the understanding that you would at some point in the future um if you wanted to increase the dock size would come back on notice um and uh basically have your parking uh
circulation study and b parking utilization study and just do it at a different time. Um, I mean that that's the proposal right >> now. They're consenting, but but but but Shauna, so they want to
basically >> get Sure. They they want to and John confirm that what I'm saying is correct. They're asking for us to vote tonight and basically approve it with an eight vote slip uh total. um thereby
technically Jackie eliminating the parking variance and uh let me just write that and but they want to reserve their right to come back in the future >> um >> not raised >> technically as part of a the the same application or uh but on notice and then
not rest due to and basically say hey we have more information at maybe at that point they might have the D approval they'll have the parking utilization study and at that point they want Um, >> amended application. >> Yes,
>> I think that's a good >> I would like to make that motion with the usual stipulations that you put in uh Kevin. >> Absolutely. >> Parking barracks >> that are in it from 70. >> Yes.
>> Five foot. >> No, it was 300 feet. So it obviously shortens it by how many feet will the length of the dock will the dock be now? Any clue? >> Yeah, that's a good point. >> Our our clients don't anticipate that
there will be any outside people coming other than guests of those residents who have a boat. >> I'm just saying the dock if you're going to put in eight eight slips, how far will that go out?
>> Yeah. Like in other words, >> your engineer engineer figure that out. >> If if they're going with eight boat slips now, how far out will that go from the bulkhead? >> Right. Uh one second, please.
>> Got to figure it's almost half. It's got to be maybe >> maybe 150 ft less. >> Yeah. Can't we just >> I think it's fine. 4* 8. >> We'll just get a not to exceed figure.
>> 4 * 20 is 80. >> It would be between 180 and 190. I'm scaling off this. I I you know I can provide a a a direct number to the board if if necessary, but in that range. So, so not more than 190.
>> Not to exceed 190. >> Got it. >> Would that be the easier way to address it? >> Not more than 190 be fine. >> Hold on. Yeah, that if there's eight slips and they're 15 feet each, isn't that 120?
>> Okay. 190. Yes. >> Yes. 990 would give us plenty of would be room for the eight slips. >> Okay. And the eight slips at the sizes that you talked about earlier. >> Just draw a line through the plan that's
there. The first eight are coming in. What's left will be the next application when we get our D permits. >> Okay. Good. you want to >> sure >> summarize so we can motion >> so I had uh taken the liberty of
preparing some potential conditions uh so some of them that we are standard conditions would be compliance with all promises commitments and representations that the team made tonight including the ones in the last two minutes and and that's important because if I don't say it now if they said it during the hearing it counts compliance with TNM's
review letter Jackie any reason you need to review grading and drainage details or that's already in the body of your letter. Got it. Okay. We have compliance with the affordable housing rules, regulations, contributions, directives as as um our affordable housing regulations require.
We talked about the outside approvals and if there's any material change need to come back. Ultimately, we're going to have a need a professional certification from your design team confirming that the improvements were installed in accordance with the approved plans, in accordance with the testimony, and in accordance with the resolution. We'll
have an asbuilt survey. Uh we talked about the public access easement you're going to give us and I know it's somewhere in floating in Burough Hall, but just if you can send that to Shauna and myself and to Jackie and we'll just confirm that it's done in ordinance and it the signage requirement complies with
whatever the ordinance requires. Um, we didn't say this, but it's implied and we should say it that uh uh compliant compliance with all the terms of the prior resolution of approval from 2010 unless specifically ovated herein and um
let's see uh the marina is for residents only and ADA requirements you talked about the fire >> residents can have guests but >> absolutely and guests >> the boat ownership has to be residents. >> Yes. and uh the fire department review
and approval. Um let's see. The pavilion, obviously, it's not going to be used as living space. That seemed more important when I didn't know that was not going to have walls on it. Um let's see. Um Jackie, you had said something in your letter about na national heritage program. Is that do I
have to worry about that or you said why did you copy them? Is there any historical issue? Okay. Um and Jackie, you're just your letter disclosed. Hey, um there's those new New Jersey um height requirements the real but I don't
think that applies and uh no work in the deed uh restriction or conservation area and let's see so some of the things we talked about tonight. Oh, I wrote if Mr. Junko is okay with it and Andy is okay with it if you can send me your outline.
Um and then uh let's see. We talked about um uh the public access easement remains unmodified. Um it's uh the capacity even though you're
saying it's 80 approximately 80 people would have to comply with the the construction code requirements. Um again we talked about not open to the public just the residents and their guests. Um, and then just in terms of compliance with the noise ordinance, I mean,
there's no loudspeakers out there, no anything like that. >> A pretty wild crowd. They get rocking around 12:30, 1:00 a.m. >> It's uh the noise ornaments, uh, amplified music. All right. Uh, docs limited to the residents, uh, and
guests. the residents. Um, there's no, just before we're going, there's no rental of boats, there's no storage of boats, there's no services performed, there's no restaurant in the marina. Um, no boat storage on display. Um, let's
see. Uh, I'm not going to be any type of gas dispensary. I mean, I don't think they allow that anymore. Um, and compliant signage. Uh, we talked about downward lighting. I'm going to have a little bit more on that later on.
Uh, we're having um Jackie, do I have to I don't have to worry about anything with EV parking or did I just say apply it? Okay. >> Okay. And uh no uh John, you said no boats, no
boat trailers, no uh boat services, repairs and all of those things. Um and to your point earlier, if it gets approved, they have to operate within what we're going to call the operational parameters of what we have all discussed tonight. I call that sort of the
intensity regulator. It is a a use variant. So that's why you all have pinpointed and and asked for very specific information and all that information is going to be uh drawn the box within which they have to operate and it will be binding on successors
and assigns uh even if we didn't say that that would be um compliance with the flood regulations and ADA regulations. Uh, let's see. It's openwalled. Um,
all right. Fire protection per the code. Comply with the no invasive plantings. Um, and I think the implication was, which is clearly not going to be a problem for you, but we we usually have in there that you have to perpetually maintain and replace and
replant this this landscaping. And clearly that it's in such a beautiful condition. I don't think that's uh we have downward dark sky lighting. I think that was the the term that we're using. Um, no adverse light spillover. Um,
downward directed LED lighting. Um, and then we talked about the putting them on lighting a motion sensor or on some type of timer. And, uh, the bulkhead is being replaced in kind. Um,
okay. Um, Andy, I wrote get outline again, so I must really want your outline. Um, let's see. And then we're getting down to the information that came up uh just after the break, which would
basically uh well, let me see. Um that stuff was we're going to revise the plans to say eight slips only, the dock not to exceed 190 ft and uh we're going
to eliminate the parking variance and uh we're acknowledging that they can come back on notice um and that it's not going to be a rescue dicata issue. So we can't deny them just for that reason.
And I think that's it. So, John, are those conditions uh generally acceptable? >> I think they're overbearing, but we will certainly accept them. >> Thank you for the compliment. M >> Mr. Junk, I appreciate you addressing the concerns of the board. Um that's a
big deal. I think you guys did a great job with the prominade and you know, the atrium is a great building. It serves a great purpose in this town. And um I'll make a motion to approve per per Mr.
Kennedy's uh >> burdens and conditions. >> I'll second. >> Ray Mass, >> yes. >> Jonathan Gilde, >> yes. >> Vincent Light, >> yes. >> Paul Kagno,
>> yes. Eugene Horowitz. >> Yes. >> Chris Havens, >> yes. >> And Dor Dorothy Cerillo, >> Carillo, I'm sorry. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Motion to adjourn.
Third. >> Yes. A coffee and I'll send you the electronic. >> Thank you. Thank you.