1 1 HUDSON COUNTY PLANNING BOARD 2 3 RE: : 4 MONTHLY MEETING : TRANSCRIPT OF : PROCEEDINGS 5 : : 6 - - - - - - - - - - - Hudson County 7 Administration Building, Freeholders Chambers 8 567 Pavonia Avenue Third Floor 9 Jersey City, New Jersey Wednesday, July 19, 2006 10 6:30 p.m. 11 BEFORE: 12 RENEE BETTINGER, Chairwoman DANIEL CHOFFO, Vice-Chair 13 MARY E. AVAGLIANO, Commissioner HON. DOREEN DiDOMINICO, Freeholder 14 JUDE FITZGIBBONS, Commissioner BORIVOJ JASEK, Commissioner 15 RUSHABH MEHTA, Commissioner 16 17 ALSO PRESENT: 18 DANIEL F. BECHT, ESQ., Board Attorney 19 STEPHEN MARKS, Board Secretary 20 Reported By: 21 Shari Cathey 22 23 Reporting Services Arranged Through: Veritext/New Jersey Reporting Company 24 25B Vreeland Road, Suite 301 Florham Park, New Jersey 07932 25 Tel: (973) 410-4040 2 1 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Good evening. 2 I'd like to call to order the Hudson County Planning 3 Board. Counsel, has the meeting been properly 4 advertised? 5 MR. BECHT: Yes, Madam Chair. It has 6 been properly advertised according to the New Jersey 7 Public Meetings Act, posted on the bulletin board of 8 the County as well as the Board of the Chosen 9 Freeholders. 10 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Mr. Secretary, 11 may I have a roll call, please? 12 MR. MARKS: Commisioner Avagliano. 13 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Here. 14 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Choffo. 15 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Here. 16 MR. MARKS: Commissioner DiDomenico 17 is not present. Commissioner Dublin, not present. 18 Commissioner Fitzsimmons. 19 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: Here. 20 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Holloway, 21 not present. Commissioner Jasek. 22 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Here. 23 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Mehta. 24 Commissioner Ng, not present. Chairwoman Bettinger. 25 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Here. 3 1 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, we have a 2 quorum. 3 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Will everyone 4 please rise to salute the flag. 5 (Flag Salute.) 6 Have all of the Commissioners received the 7 minutes? Can I have a motion to approve? 8 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, on a motion 9 to approve the minutes of June 21st, 2006, made by 10 Commissioner Fitzgibbons, second by Commissioner 11 Choffo. 12 Commissioner Avagliano. 13 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: I'll 14 abstain. I wasn't here. 15 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Choffo. 16 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Aye. 17 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Fitzgibbons. 18 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 19 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Jasek. 20 COMMISSIONER JASEK: I didn't read 21 the minutes, but I am reading them, and I vote aye. 22 MR. MARKS: Chairwoman Bettinger. 23 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: I vote aye. 24 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, the motion 25 passed. 4 1 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: 2 Memorialization of the resolutions approved at the 3 last meeting. 4 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, the first 5 part of the agenda tonight is memorialization of 6 resolutions approved at the last meeting, beginning 7 with Application SP-42-06, Kearny Auto Spa, LLC, 8 located at 94 Passaic Avenue, Kearny, New Jersey. 9 The next is Application SP-55-06, Mushroom 10 Development, LLC, located at 321-323 First Street, 11 Jersey City. The next application is SP-56-06, New 12 Cingular Wireless, PCS, LLC, located at 5414-16 Park 13 Avenue, West New York, and finally, the last 14 application is SP-62-06, Ace Bergen Turnpike, LLC, 15 located at 4201-4203 Bergen Turnpike, in North 16 Bergen. 17 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Can I have a 18 motion? 19 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, on a motion 20 to approve made by Commissioner Choffo. Second by 21 Commissioner Avagliano. 22 Commissioner Avagliano. 23 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 24 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Choffo. 25 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Aye. 5 1 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Fitzgibbons. 2 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 3 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Jasek. 4 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Aye. 5 MR. MARKS: Chairwoman Bettinger. 6 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Aye. 7 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, the motion 8 passed. 9 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Applications 10 declared to be exempt. 11 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, the first 12 application is SP-65-06, Sprint Spectrum, located at 13 368-370 Broadway in Bayonne. The next is 14 Application SP-67-06, Nextel of New York, Inc., 205 15 66th Street, West New York. The next application is 16 SP-70-06, M & M at Crescent Court, LLC, Merseles, 17 First and Second Streets, Jersey City. The next 18 application is SP-71-06, New Cingular Wireless, PCS, 19 LLC, located at Central Avenue in Union City. The 20 next application is SP-72-06, New Cingular Wireless 21 PCS, LLC, 514 Madison Avenue, Hoboken, New Jersey. 22 The next application is SP-74-06, New Cingular 23 Wireless, PCS, LLC, located at 507-511 Kearny 24 Avenue, Kearny, and the last application declared to 25 be exempt, SP-75-06, New Cingular Wireless, PCS, 6 1 LLC, located at Route 169 and New Hook Road in 2 Bayonne. 3 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Do I have a 4 motion? 5 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, on a motion 6 to approve made by Commissioner Avagliano, and 7 seconded by Commissioner Fitzgibbons. 8 Commissioner Avagliano. 9 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 10 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Choffo. 11 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Aye. 12 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Fitzgibbons. 13 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 14 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Jasek. 15 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Aye. 16 MR. MARKS: Chairwoman Bettinger. 17 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Aye. 18 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, the 19 possession passed. 20 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Next is 21 applications scheduled for public Hearing. 22 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, the 23 application is SP-50-06, Journal Square Estates, 24 located at 3075-3091 Kennedy Boulevard in Jersey 25 City. 7 1 Madam Chair, just for the records, we have 2 been joined by Commissioner Mehta and Commissioner 3 DiDominico. 4 MR. SCHILLER: Good evening, 5 Commissioners, Francis Schiller from Connell Foley 6 representing the applicant. Commissioners, this 7 application, I think most of us remember as the old 8 Chevrolet property on Kennedy Boulevard. It's for 9 three multi-story apartment buildings for seven, 10 eight and eleven stories, with restaurant or retail 11 space consisting of 10,000 square feet, plus four 12 stories of parking deck underneath. That parking 13 deck is on that slope that runs down the Boulevard 14 down to Skillman. Access to the parking deck will 15 be off Skillman from Kennedy Boulevard. 16 There will be 249 residential units, 17 10,000 square foot of restaurant or retail space, 18 and they will provide 263 parking spaces. We have 19 received Mr. Demetrio's report, and it has been 20 reviewed several times, and we were informed of all 21 the recommendations that are there. I have today, 22 this evening, with us, the architect and the 23 engineer and the traffic engineer, depending on what 24 testimony you would like to have, Madam Chair. 25 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Did you have 8 1 any comments? 2 COMMISSIONER JASEK: There was a 3 comment in the memo within the here, the engineer 4 can speak to that. 5 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, the comment 6 that Mr. Jasek is referring to is located in 7 everyone's packet. This is on top of -- the there 8 were two letters from myself to the applicant with 9 comments on top of the comment letter that was 10 issued by Mr. Demetrio. This is the substance of 11 the comments, that the applicant was interested in 12 getting in there, and there was a little bit of a 13 rush. These comments did make it into the previous 14 letters. I think there were comments that we have, 15 perhaps after the applicant's engineer or architect 16 makes their presentation. 17 MR. SCHILLER: This is Mr. Ron 18 Russell, the architect who developed the 19 application. 20 (The witness is sworn.) 21 MR. BECHT: Please state your name 22 and address for the record. 23 MR. RUSSELL: Ronald J. Russell, LWDM 24 Architects, Jersey City, 140 Bay Street. 25 MR. SCHILLER: Walk the Commissioners 9 1 through the project, please. 2 MR. RUSSELL: I have a site plan 3 here, proposed site plan. Just to give you 4 location, this is Route 1 & 9. I'm sorry, move 5 closer? 6 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Yes. 7 MR. RUSSELL: Kennedy Boulevard is at 8 the bottom, 1 & 9, the ramp coming down to your 9 right. St. Paul's Avenue is over here, Skillman 10 Avenue on top of the sheet. The Volkswagen 11 dealership is currently right here. What we're 12 proposing to do is building three residential 13 buildings. Building A is parallel 1 & 9, it's 14 eleven stories, Building B, which is parallel to 15 Skillman Avenue is seven stories, and Building C, 16 which is parallel to Kennedy Boulevard, facing 17 Kennedy Boulevard, is eight stories. 18 Building C will have 111 units. Building 19 B will have 32 units and retail space on Kennedy 20 Boulevard. Between these buildings will be a 21 four-level parking garage with 250 or 63 parking 22 spaces, 82 or 81 of those space will be access from 23 Kennedy Boulevard. The remaining spaces will be 24 accessed from Skillman Avenue. Access to the garage 25 will be from the south end of the project, Kennedy 10 1 Boulevard, and the exit from the garage will be from 2 the north end of the garage. 3 We relocated the access, made the egress 4 of the building away from one another based on 5 comments, and also, provided 82 parking spaces 6 accessed from Kennedy Boulevard, 24 of those spaces 7 will be designated as the retail space on the ground 8 floor, and they will be signed with the comment that 9 these parking spaces are designated for the retail 10 space. We will also have an exit sign at the exit 11 and an entrance sign at the entrance. On the 12 interior we will have Do Not Exit signs so cars will 13 not exit the building where they should not exit it, 14 and we will have exit signs at the proper exit 15 points. Do you want to hear anything else? 16 MR. BECHT: For the record, would you 17 identify the drawing? 18 MR. RUSSELL: The drawing I'm 19 presented SP-3.0 and is dated, last dated revision 20 is 3/6/06. 21 MR. SCHILLER: That concludes the 22 architect. Is there any questions? I would like to 23 presents the engineer next. 24 MR. REEVES: Jeffrey Reeves. 25 (The witness is sworn.) 11 1 MR. BECHT: State your name and 2 address for the record. 3 MR. REEVES: Jeffrey Reeves, with 4 Dresdner Robin, 371 Warren Street, Jersey City. 5 From an engineering standpoint, I'll run through the 6 building the way the architect did. A majority of 7 all of utilities that are on Skillman Avenue and 8 utilities on Kennedy Boulevard from the construction 9 will be reused, and all of the proposed utilities 10 for the structure come from Skillman to mitigation 11 the stormwater runoff and will comply with the all 12 of the New Jersey Sanitary Construction Codes. 13 Beyond that we are, as you see here, 14 landscaping along Skillman Avenue and Kennedy 15 Boulevard. In our submission to the County, the 16 County had some comments on Kennedy Boulevard. 17 These color drawings which show where the impacts 18 are with the development along Kennedy Boulevard. 19 What we are proposing to do is modify the island in 20 the center of Kennedy Boulevard and construct a 21 concrete barrier down the middle of Kennedy 22 Boulevard. 23 We are working with the County review 24 agents to supply us with the program which will 25 require us to do a modified drawing, and they have 12 1 provided us with the comments to provide a planter 2 in front of the proposed development that would 3 restrict people from stopping along the road and 4 getting out and walking into the building. This 5 planter would lend to prevent that from happening. 6 It's a decorative planter, about two feet high with 7 low shrubs, not enough to hide the building but 8 enough deter someone from stopping in front. 9 The entrance and exits for parking are 10 along in front of the building as described by the 11 architect. There are adequate signs along the 12 roadway, again, shown here restricting left-turn 13 movements into the entrance and left-turn movements 14 going into the exit. Basically that's the engineer 15 layout. 16 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: What about 17 deliveries for the retail stores? 18 MR. REEVES: All of the deliveries 19 are taken off of Skillman Avenue. There's the 20 entrance and a loading facility, and all of the 21 trash will be coming from Skillman Avenue and not 22 coming from Kennedy Boulevard. 23 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Okay. 24 MR. BECHT: Could you put on the 25 record the map identification? 13 1 MR. REEVES: I was just describing 2 SP.3.1, which is called Kennedy Boulevard 3 Improvement Site. That's the most recent plan we 4 put together in response to the review agent's 5 comments. 6 MR. BECHT: Thank you. 7 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Michael, do you 8 have some comments? 9 BOARD ENGINEER: I was reading the 10 comments, and I have one comment that I still 11 believe that the engineer should contact the NJDOT 12 in reference to the installation of the concrete 13 median along Kennedy Boulevard. It's very close to 14 the ramp on 1 & 9, and also close the intersection 15 of 139 and Kennedy Boulevard, so you may need a 16 permit from the traffic safety in NJDOT. 17 MR. REEVES: We'll contact them and 18 send them a drawing to see if it's warranted. It's 19 our belief it's not because we are adequate distance 20 away from the ramp. We don't impact the New Jersey 21 DOT facilities, but we can contact them. 22 BOARD ENGINEER: You are accessing, 23 giving a left turn into the ramp. 24 MR. REEVES: We are maintaining the 25 existing left turn. We're not impacting it. All 14 1 we're doing is putting in a concrete barrier 2 adjacent. 3 BOARD ENGINEER: I'm saying that 4 since it's changing the existing condition, you 5 might need it. 6 MR. SCHILLER: We'll contact DOT. If 7 it's required, we will get whatever permits. 8 BOARD ENGINEER: I don't have a copy 9 of the latest plan that you have with the new width 10 of the median. One of the comments that we had 11 previously was that we need eleven foot minimum on 12 each lane northbound, southbound, and ten foot for 13 the left turn into the ramp. 14 MR. REEVES: We have all of them. 15 This drawing shows eleven-foot lanes, two in the 16 northbound direct, two in the southbound direction, 17 ten-foot, left-turn lane going into the ramp onto 18 the ramp on US 1, also a ten-foot ramp turning onto 19 St. Paul's Avenue. This shows the striping. The 20 minimum island is four feet wide, and the maximum 21 island is 14 feet wide, right on the side. 22 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Okay. You have 23 the striping? 24 MR. REEVES: The striping is there. 25 This is based on our latest review comments. 15 1 BOARD ENGINEER: Also, it should be 2 specified the way or the method of the existing 3 stripes along Kennedy Boulevard. 4 MR. REEVES: I'm sorry. 5 BOARD ENGINEER: The method that you 6 or the contractor is going to use to remove the 7 existing stripe on Kennedy Boulevard. It should be 8 nondestructive to the existing pavement and put a 9 margin of 1/16th of an inch when they remove the 10 existing stripe. 11 MR. REEVES: Would that be in 12 conformance with the DOT specs? 13 BOARD ENGINEER: Yes. 14 MR. REEVES: Is that what the County 15 follows? 16 BOARD ENGINEER: Yes, the County 17 follows the DOT specs. 18 MR. REEVES: We will comply with 19 that. That's no problem. 20 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: Did you do 21 a traffic study on that? 22 MR. SCHILLER: Yes, and the traffic 23 engineer is here if you would like to hear 24 testimony. We'll put her on next. 25 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: Even 16 1 though you have parking facilities -- for how many 2 cars? 3 MR. SCHILLER: 263 parking spaces. 4 MR. REEVES: But they're not all 5 accessing Kennedy Boulevard. A majority of them are 6 on Skillman. 7 MR. SCHILLER: You have around four 8 decks, two in the back and two in the front? 9 MR. REEVES: Yes. 10 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: How many on 11 Kennedy Boulevard? 12 MR. REEVES: Eighty-one are on 13 Kennedy Boulevard. The remaining 182 are on 14 Skillman Avenue. 15 MR. RUSSELL: A majority to the rear 16 of the building which do not impact Kennedy 17 Boulevard. 18 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: And there will 19 be assigned spaces for the retailers? 20 MR. SCHILLER: Yes, there will be 21 enough spaces for everyone. 22 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: My concern is 23 if there are not, they may back up onto Kennedy 24 Boulevard. 25 MR. REEVES: There will be assigned 17 1 space. 2 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: How are you 3 going to handle the construction aspects, by closing 4 Kennedy Boulevard and Skillman Avenue? 5 MR. RUSSELL: At some point, 6 obviously, we're going to have to access Kennedy 7 Boulevard through the streetscape which will be 8 worked out with the town. We will be putting in the 9 curbs and sidewalks, and at some point, we will be 10 on Kennedy Boulevard. A majority of the 11 construction access will be all on Skillman. 12 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Are you 13 building a pool? 14 MR. RUSSELL: We are proposing on the 15 upper level an option for a condominium association, 16 if it would become a condominium, they will have an 17 option for a pool below the parking deck. There is 18 a landscaped plaza, and on that landscaped plaza, 19 there is an option for a pool. If the pool doesn't 20 get constructed, that area will be landscaped 21 further. 22 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: In a 23 condominium there is always the possibility for 24 take-out food, pizza, Chinese, how are you going to 25 handle the deliveries? It won't be on Kennedy 18 1 Boulevard? 2 MR. REEVES: The whole reason you see 3 on this, this is the original site plan, you do not 4 have that planter, and we went to the County 5 Planner, and they asked us to construct a planter in 6 the front to stop that, to stop that right in front 7 of the building. This is laid out to try to make it 8 not convenient and use Skillman Avenue instead. 9 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: What I'm 10 saying on is Kennedy Boulevard, Building A, I guess 11 when they order pizza or Chinese, they will have to 12 come out? 13 MR. REEVES: Yes, Building C. 14 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, I just 15 wanted to address a couple comments which we had. 16 There was a conversation and consultation with 17 Chairman Davis from the Jersey City Zoning Board. 18 The application and site plan approval had 14 spaces 19 for the retail space, and they asked the applicant 20 to dedicate additional parking space, up to 24 21 spaces. We did see receive a revised site plan that 22 had 24 spaces delineated to the retail spaces. I 23 just want to put on the record those changes are 24 made by the applicant. 25 Also, it was the recommendation of the 19 1 Site Plan Review Committee that the applicant 2 install a bus shelter, work with the County and New 3 Jersey Transit, and the applicant is taking 4 advantage of the site location and proximity to the 5 Journal Square Path, and the applicant does 6 anticipate a number of residents using the bus 7 transit access in Journal Square. We wanted the 8 applicant to provide that ability for his residents. 9 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: A shuttle-type 10 bus? 11 MR. SCHILLER: I'm sorry, no, he was 12 talking about a bus shelter for all people, not just 13 for the people who live over here, and that would be 14 agreeable. 15 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, the shuttle 16 service was originally commented by the Site Plan 17 Review Committee. In consultation with Ms. Davis of 18 Jersey City, she thought that the transit service on 19 Kennedy Boulevard was sufficient to the residents on 20 Journal Square. She didn't think it was necessary 21 to really add to that. 22 And finally, the DEP requested that the 23 applicant put in a bicycle rack for either 24 transportation purposes or recreation purposes. 25 MR. SCHILLER: That's correct. 20 1 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Madam Chairman, 2 I have a question. How are you going to control 3 your access to the garage for residents and for the 4 customers? 5 MR. RUSSELL: I think that would be 6 by the signs. There would be designated parking 7 spaces for each tenant, so the tenant will know to 8 go through to their designated area or space and 9 they will have access them. In terms of the 10 retail -- 11 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: It will be 12 marked reserved? 13 MR. RUSSELL: It will be mark 14 reserved, yes. The retail space basically is on 15 Kennedy Boulevard, and parking patrons will have 16 signs for entrance, and it will be signed for retail 17 space only. In terms of visitors, I think it will 18 be clearly marked by signs. 19 COMMISSIONER JASEK: In that aspect, 20 the visitors for the business will park there first, 21 and what's left for the customers will be there for 22 the customers? 23 MR. SCHILLER: No, that would be up 24 to the tenants to provide parking, whether it is in 25 our building or outside of the building. There will 21 1 be 24 spaces for customers. 2 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: For the 3 retail? 4 COMMISSIONER JASEK: The number of 5 the spaces has been a problem before. They will 6 stay there. It's my experience now. 7 MR. SCHILLER: We can limit an hour 8 of parking, but that's something you have to control 9 at any building where you have retail space or 10 workers, and you have to -- the tenants will have to 11 provide for parking one way or the other either 12 rented space someplace or providing off-street 13 parking. 14 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: There is no 15 off-street parking. That's going to be an issue for 16 visitors. 17 MR. SCHILLER: The idea that is we 18 have 24 space, open spaces for retail that can be 19 handed over to employees. That is a landlord-tenant 20 issue and not a planning issue. 21 COMMISSIONER JASEK: I know. I 22 understand. That is the space for the customers are 23 not for the customers. 24 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: At the same time 25 people, if they don't find retail parking, they 22 1 drive through in a circle and create more traffic, 2 at the same time you have the people from the pizza 3 delivery double-parking in front. But for the 4 planning stages and for practical purposes, it will 5 be a problem. What type of a retail are you 6 planning to use in the place of business? 7 MR. SCHILLER: We don't know that 8 yet. We need a tenant. It will be a restaurant or 9 retail space. You have retail tenants right down 10 the street here. 11 MR. RUSSELL: The reason why the 12 planning people want the barrier here is because if 13 you park here, you have to get out and walk all the 14 way around and get back in. So there's not going to 15 be the encouragement to park in front of the 16 building. The stores further down on Kennedy 17 themselves they have the ones you can pull right in 18 front of it and run into the building. 19 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: There's a 20 school there. 21 MR. RUSSELL: The school is next to 22 ours down on the other block a ways, but there's 23 going to be a natural barrier, and there's no 24 parking along there anyway. 25 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: But when the 23 1 school is being dismissed, there are cars lined up 2 and if we put that barrier there, what's going to 3 happen? I live in the area. The school there has a 4 line of cars. 5 COMMISSIONER JASEK: The planters are 6 only right in front of the building, they don't go 7 beyond that? 8 MR. SCHILLER: Absolutely. 9 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Madam Chair, it 10 is only between the driveways. 11 MR. SCHILLER: It's not in front of 12 the school. 13 COMMISSIONER JASEK: A very specific 14 area. 15 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: The cars still 16 extend in front of your property. 17 COMMISSIONER JASEK: They are not 18 allowed to be between the driveways. 19 MR. REEVES: That's there now, I 20 agree. I think it's there. There is something to 21 mitigate it. 22 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Yes, right. 23 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: You don't allow 24 for traffic if there is no room for them going to 25 the retail space. At the same time they use the 24 1 parking for the tenants, and we asked you to 2 increase the amount for approval. 3 MR. SCHILLER: The reason why 14 4 spaces were originally allocated is because that's 5 what Jersey City requires. We did more than what 6 Jersey City looks for. 7 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: I understand. 8 MR. SCHILLER: Your Board, your 9 experts asked us to increase it to 24 spaces in 10 their comment. 11 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: I understand. 12 That means that you have parking space to add to the 13 retail, the ten spaces. You have go back to the 14 Board. 15 MR. SCHILLER: I believe that Mark 16 has talked to Ms. Davis, and she has agreed to 17 taking the 24 spaces and making it 263 spaces, 24 of 18 them earmarked for retail, and it will be 249 19 residential units and that will be for them. 20 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: There are 263 21 spaces, 24 that's retail, so there would be one 22 parking space for each condominium, and that's the 23 same magic number. 24 MR. RUSSELL: One of the things 25 within the zone, we are not required to provide 25 1 parking. The parking requirement is zero spaces, so 2 we actually don't need approval because we exceed 3 260 based on the R-3 zone. 4 MR. SCHILLER: So we are providing 5 over an abundance of what's required in the statute, 6 running over. 7 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Does the garage 8 have assess from St. Pauls Avenue? 9 MR. REEVES: Yes, it does. 10 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: And so you did 11 traffic engineering studies that would be part of 12 the street? 13 MR. SCHILLER: It was done and we 14 have a traffic engineer expert to testify. These 15 are architects and engineers. 16 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: I have one 17 concern. Once you put the barrier up on Kennedy 18 Boulevard and someone is traveling northbound and 19 they want to get into your building, I'm concerned 20 they're going to make a U-turn instead of going onto 21 139. 22 MR. REEVES: It's going to have 23 signs. 24 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: They will 25 still make the U-turn. 26 1 MR. REEVES: I can't prevent them 2 from doing something illegal. It was not designed 3 for that. 4 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Do we need to 5 place a sign? 6 MR. REEVES: That was not requested 7 of us. This type of arrows and striping forbids you 8 to do a U-turn. That would be an illegal move. 9 Whether there is a sign there or not, it doesn't 10 stop someone from doing something illegal. 11 MR. SCHILLER: I wouldn't do it 12 unless it was absolutely necessary. 13 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: On the 14 residential units, how many one-bedroom and how many 15 will be a two-bedroom? 16 MR. SCHILLER: I believe it's on 17 Mr. Demetrio's report. I think we have it. There 18 is a studio or bedroom -- 19 MR. RUSSELL: We have 249 units. We 20 have ten studios, 116 one-bedrooms and 119 21 two-bedrooms, and for the standards of an R-3 or R-4 22 for parking, it would be 263 minus 24, so we met the 23 standard. 24 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Can you explain 25 the layout you are doing? 27 1 MR. RUSSELL: Sure. Building C, 2 which is on sheet D-2.1 -- Building A, which is runs 3 parallel to 1 & 9, the studio is approximately 4 450 square feet. All units are handicapped 5 adaptable, so you have a 450-square-foot studio and 6 handicapped adaptable bathroom and kitchen. That 7 would be, you walk in and have a closet and it's an 8 open space. 9 A two-bedroom unit would be 1,200 square 10 feet. You would walk in and there would be two full 11 bathrooms, one of which is a standard bathroom and 12 the other of which is handicapped adaptable. You 13 walk into a large living room, kitchen, dining room 14 area. Then there are two bedrooms. The master 15 bedroom would have a handicapped adaptable bathroom 16 in it. That's about 1,200 square feet. 17 The one-bedroom unit, if I could find one, 18 is approximately 700 square feet. When you walk in 19 you have a large kitchen area, large dining room, 20 living area kitchen and a closet inside the units, 21 and large handicapped adaptable bathroom. These are 22 nice size units. They were meant to be 23 condominiums, but they are all very nice sized 24 units. 25 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: And all the 28 1 handicapped parking spaces will be on the first 2 floor of the parking garage? 3 MR. RUSSELL: No, it varies. The 4 retail space requires handicapped parking space, and 5 we need a handicapped van space. One of those 6 spaces will be a handicapped van space. We will 7 have handicapped spaces distributed evenly 8 throughout the building. 9 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Another thing I 10 noticed talking about the area where the 24 parking 11 spaces are required, how are you going to provide 12 some of type of area between the parking spaces and 13 other parking spaces so the people fill in the 14 retail space? 15 MR. RUSSELL: It is physically 16 impossible to do that because of the constraints of 17 the site. If we take the aisle space and put a 18 barrier in there, we'll actually need a second 19 aisle. Each unit on D-1.2.7, each of the units that 20 have been provided for retail will have a sign on it 21 designating it retail parking only, all others will 22 be towed at the owner's expense. All retail parking 23 spaces will have that sign clearly marked, and 24 really. If you go to Secaucus to go to the movies 25 there, they have parking spaces for the hotels, 29 1 parking space for the offices, so they really 2 designated them. These are the standards that 3 everyone else uses to control the parking. 4 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Will there be 5 door security? 6 MR. RUSSELL: Most likely there will 7 be a concierge because of the number of units, and 8 also, newly required by the city of Jersey City are 9 video cameras on the exit of the building. 10 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: I had the 11 pleasure of seeing the site. It's a beautiful set 12 of buildings. 13 MR. RUSSELL: There are three 14 buildings. The building on top here is on Kennedy 15 Boulevard. It is contemporary and has a glass bay, 16 a large glass bay. On 1 & 9, there will be a base 17 that will be cast in stone. The base stands out 18 five feet approximately. Then there will be a mix 19 of two color bricks, red brick and a dark brownish 20 brick, and that breaks down the scale of the 21 building. 22 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: They're 23 beautiful. We would like to hear from the traffic 24 engineer. Thank you. 25 (The witness is sworn.) 30 1 MR. BECHT: Please state your name 2 and address for the record. 3 MS. SWAMINATHAN: Malini Swaminathan 4 from 38 Franklin Drive in Plainsboro, New Jersey. 5 MR. SCHILLER: Could you give us the 6 benefit of some of your background? 7 MS. SWAMINATHAN: I have a bachelor's 8 degree and master's degree from the University of 9 Wisconsin. I am a PE and professional traffic 10 operation engineer, certified by IT, and I've had 11 about 16 years experience in New Jersey doing 12 traffic. On the County side, I used to work for 13 Essex County viewing site plans from the engineering 14 office, and I worked on the Garden State Parkway 15 doing traffic there. 16 MR. SCHILLER: You prepared the 17 traffic study on this site? 18 MS. SWAMINATHAN: There was an 19 original traffic study that was submitted in Jersey 20 City that was prepared by Sam Schwartz, LLC, and to 21 the County Planning Board for additional traffic 22 study, and I prepared the supplemental traffic study 23 with regard to accident analysis and in the field 24 the traffic output on Tonnelle and St. Pauls Avenue. 25 The original was reviewed and accepted by Jersey 31 1 City. 2 MR. SCHILLER: And you did that in 3 light of their report, you were aware of what the 4 County Planning Board wanted? 5 MS. SWAMINATHAN: Right. The 6 original traffic study reviewed the traffic at St. 7 Paul and JFK and Route 1 intersection with Skillman 8 Avenue and the St. Paul intersection. Both of them 9 can function to capacity with mitigation on the 10 impact, a tiny change on the lights are recommended, 11 and at Skillman, there was a question of cuing with 12 cars making a left turn. On St. Pauls there was a 13 light cuing, particularly not a problem. 14 Worst-case scenario, 95 percent, it was 15 predicted to be some back up, and the urge from the 16 traffic study said in that case, people have to turn 17 right and use Tonnelle to access Route 1 & 9. That 18 is why the Hudson County Planning Board asked for a 19 supplemental study. I did that study and felt there 20 was no additional impact because the number of 21 traffic turning right was not a problem. 22 I also did an accident analysis for the 23 Planning Board, and I guess I'm not telling you 24 something new about the accidents there. It is so 25 identified at this corridor, and I researched the 32 1 reasons for it. It is not on the street, left-turn 2 accidents and right-turn accidents. It is more of a 3 concern about the amount of pedestrian accidents, 4 and it also identified there was a problem because 5 of the timing. There was very few pedestrian 6 accidents here because more people are not crossing 7 in the middle of the street. There were only two 8 pedestrian accidents, and that was people crossing 9 at this intersection. 10 I can see that. I discussed that at 11 length with the Planning Board Engineer, and I 12 recommended driving to that intersection for a 13 couple of reasons, to put a sign saying, do not 14 cross here, so they would cross at St. Pauls Avenue 15 where are crosswalks, not at that location. The 16 other thing was, I identified that there were number 17 of accidents here, and I believe that the mitigation 18 was to drive through the intersection so that the 19 people coming out of the 1 & 9, so that people were 20 aware that there was not left-turning traffic 21 allowed there, and change the striping. 22 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Any other 23 comments? 24 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Could you tell 25 us what was the level of traffic at St. Paul's and 33 1 Kennedy Boulevard. 2 MS. SWAMINATHAN: I'd rather than not 3 trust my memory, and that intersection in this case 4 is working in good condition. Most of the movements 5 are A-B intersection. Under built conditions, the 6 southbound lanes peak level drop from a C to a D, 7 functioning overall at the level of C. 8 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Basically your 9 recommendations are to change the timing? 10 MS. SWAMINATHAN: The recommendation 11 is to adjust the timing at JFK Boulevard and 139. 12 The signal can be timed to include the levels at 13 evening peak hours, and the JFK Boulevard and St. 14 Pauls, not even timing is an option. It's still 15 functioning at the same level. The Route 1 ramp, 16 the analysis for these conditions is worse than what 17 it is, and that was the condition itself because the 18 analysis does not take into account the fact that 19 there is enough space on either side, and that is 20 something that we can take into account, and so the 21 analysis shows it being larger than what is actually 22 found there. The gaps are available for the cars to 23 go through, and that will continue at that length. 24 The cue length available does not exceed the storage 25 capacity. We are expecting a cue length of 220, a 34 1 storage capacity of 240, so that should not have any 2 problem spilling over. 3 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Then any people 4 coming from Route 1 & 9 North and try to make a 5 right and left turn, some of them might make a right 6 turn, and but they can find a way to come together. 7 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: My concern is 8 Kennedy Boulevard because of there senior building 9 there. I wanted to make sure for the record that 10 the time changing gives ample time to seniors to 11 cross the Boulevard. 12 MS. SWAMINATHAN: To change timing, 13 you have to do it and so it allows time for the 14 crosswalk, so I don't see either -- and the timing 15 change has to be certified by Hudson County Traffic 16 or the State. 17 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Does the plans 18 for the intersection at 139 and JFK go to the State? 19 MS. SWAMINATHAN: Everything goes to 20 State, but a County signal has to be certified. 21 It's not something that a contractor or engineer can 22 adjust. 23 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: I have a 24 basic question, and I think some people that occupy 25 the apartments, I think they're those who commute to 35 1 the city? 2 MR. SCHILLER: That's our hope, that 3 they use mass transit. Journal Square is going to 4 take a lot of activities that you normally would 5 see. 6 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: If you 7 sell the product the right way, I come from Hoboken 8 a majority of people that live in houses like that 9 will not take the cars to commute, and I don't think 10 New Jersey Transit buses are the answer. I think 11 the commuter companies, whatever, at some locations 12 and you have a stop there to pick them up. 13 MR. SCHILLER: I think a lot of 14 people would walk. That's something that we would 15 be looking into especially now with bus service. 16 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: I'm sure 17 they're going to because of the access to the police 18 station. 19 MR. SCHILLER: I think that what is 20 here that really makes an attraction. Living here 21 in Jersey City, you're not going to see as much 22 activity during the day with cars coming from this 23 building with people working, walking, taking mass 24 transit. I think that's the whole plan or idea. 25 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Can you tell me 36 1 what time this traffic study was done? 2 MS. SWAMINATHAN: The traffic counts? 3 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: The traffic 4 count and traffic study, do you know what time? 5 MS. SWAMINATHAN: The traffic counts 6 were taken between eight and nine a.m. and 5:45 and 7 6:45. Those were identified as peaks, and these 8 were taken on January 24th, 2006. 9 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Which day? 10 MS. SWAMINATHAN: It had to be a 11 weekday. Traffic counts are, by practice, taken 12 either Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday. It's not a 13 valid traffic study if you take it on a Monday or 14 Friday, and you do not take it in the December 15 period because you have holiday traffic, and you do 16 not take it when schools are closed, again, the 17 traffic patterns, it's a summer traffic period, but 18 I would assume it's Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday. 19 I haven't looked it up, but that's when the traffic 20 counts are taken. 21 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: How are the 22 times the traffic counts were taken identified? 23 MS. SWAMINATHAN: And that is how 24 they identify the peak hour, the peak hours are 25 determined to be eight and nine a.m. and 5:45 and 37 1 6:45 p.m, and that usually is you take two hours and 2 during that time you start. 3 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: What was the 4 level taken at those times, a C? 5 MS. SWAMINATHAN: Yes, overall, 6 overall is C. Specific movements are D. 7 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: And you studied 8 the school we have on Kennedy Boulevard? 9 MS. SWAMINATHAN: Right, and that was 10 identified in the 95th percentile to be an issue. 11 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: So in your 12 expert opinion, do you see that a traffic signal is 13 required on St. Pauls Avenue? 14 MS. SWAMINATHAN: No, it's the space 15 is not sufficient, it's just too close to this 16 signal. That is what happens in urban districts, 17 you move from light to light and that bunch of 18 traffic gets through, and that's the way it is in an 19 urban traffic pattern. If it were six lanes, I 20 would tell you there would be no cue, but I wouldn't 21 know what is the amount because it could be all six 22 cars. 23 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Any other 24 questions? 25 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, in reference 38 1 to the e-mail from Assistant County Engineer 2 Demetrio dated July 13, 2006, I showed it to 3 counselor for the applicant, and there were four 4 points, and I'd like to read it into the record. 5 Counselor did get a copy of the e-mail? 6 MR. SCHILLER: Yes, correct. 7 MR. MARKS: And everybody does have a 8 copy of the e-mail, correct? 9 MR. SCHILLER: That concludes our 10 presentation. 11 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Thank you. Do 12 I have a motion to approve this application. Excuse 13 me, Commissioner, are you making a motion? 14 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, on a motion 15 to approve application SP-50-06, made by 16 Commissioner Choffo. Second by Commissioner 17 Avagliano. 18 Commissioner Avagliano. 19 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: I vote aye. 20 It's an excellent application. I go every day on 21 139. I know I am tired of the empty buildings and 22 tall fences, they are totally eyesores. 23 Congratulations, great application. 24 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Choffo. 25 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Aye. 39 1 MR. MARKS: Commissioner DiDomenico. 2 COMMISSIONER DiDOMENICO: Aye. 3 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Fitzgibbons. 4 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 5 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Jasek. 6 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Aye. 7 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Mehta. 8 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 9 MR. MARKS: Chairwoman Bettinger. 10 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: I vote aye. I 11 wish you well. It's going be to a wonderful 12 improvement to the area. 13 MR. SCHILLER: I appreciate your 14 comments. 15 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, the next 16 application scheduled for public hearing is 17 SD-58-06, James Adinolfi, located at 1615 Kennedy 18 Boulevard in Jersey City. 19 Madam Chair, it does not appear the 20 applicant is here. The applicant was notified by 21 mail. I did not receive any letters requesting that 22 the application be carried over. This was 23 originally -- this application was originally 24 scheduled for last month, and we received a letter 25 from the applicant's attorney, Mr. DePesano, 40 1 requesting that the applicant's engineer or 2 architect was not available, and that the matter be 3 held over. I haven't received anything this past 4 month. 5 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Next 6 application. 7 MR. BECHT: It's up to the Board's 8 discretion if they would like to table or whatever 9 you decide to do. 10 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: He missed the 11 last meeting? 12 MR. MARKS: He missed the last 13 meeting, but he did sent a letter. 14 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Do I have a 15 motion to table SD-58-06? 16 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, on the 17 motion to table application SP-58-06, made by 18 Commissioner Choffo. Seconded by Commission 19 DiDomenico. 20 Commissioner Avagliano. 21 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: I vote aye. 22 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Choffo. 23 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Aye. 24 MR. MARKS: Commissioner DiDomenico. 25 COMMISSIONER DiDOMENICO: Aye. 41 1 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Fitzgibbons. 2 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 3 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Jasek. 4 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Aye. 5 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Mehta. 6 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 7 MR. MARKS: Chairwoman Bettinger. 8 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Aye. 9 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, the motion 10 is carried. 11 Madam Chair, the next application 12 scheduled for public hearing is SP-60-06, Crown 13 Enterprises, Inc., located at 15 Hackensack Avenue, 14 Kearny. 15 MR. PORRO: Commissioners, I'm Ken 16 Porro, from the law firm of Wells, Jaworski, Liebman 17 & Patton on behalf of the applicant. The property 18 in question at 15 Hackensack Avenue in Kearny is a 19 15.44-acre site. It's currently improved by an 20 existing trucking company and service facility, and 21 our client, Crown, represented here by Larry Jacobs 22 to my left, we also have from Bulger Engineering, 23 Seth Buchanan, with regard to the application. 24 The application is pretty straight 25 forward. We received a review from T & M. The 42 1 property is going to be completely renovated 2 demolished, razored, however you want to call it, 3 and put a state-of-the-art trucking facility there, 4 which is a permitted use in Kearny. The comments 5 provided by T & M on July 6th, are received and well 6 respected. 7 The one comment, the applicant should the 8 revise the plans to install full-face concrete curb 9 and sidewalk at the existing curb cut on Central, 10 Central Avenue being the County road. There's no 11 objection to that. We have one County outfit, the 12 engineer and corporate representative could put on 13 that. We're looking for depressed curbing in case 14 of emergency. It's a large site. We do not need it 15 for access, but God forbid, there's a fire, it gives 16 us a secondary means of egress. We will comply with 17 all County standards with that. 18 The second is to confirm the applicant is 19 not opposed to tying into the County drainage 20 system. That's because we're tying into the 21 existing Kearny system. So if I could just bring up 22 Mr. Larry Jacobs, our corporate representative to 23 give you an overview on the application, and our 24 engineer, and talk about the depressed curbing in 25 the report. 43 1 (The witness is sworn.) 2 MR. BECHT: Please state your name 3 and address for the record. 4 MR. JACOBS: It's Jacobs, 12225 5 Stephens Road, Warren, Michigan. 6 MR. PORRO: Larry, can you just give 7 us an overview of the project. Who is Crown 8 Enterprises? 9 MR. JACOBS: It is a transportation 10 company, and this is an application that we are 11 proposing, as Ken said, to demolish an existing 12 18,000-square-foot garage building and replace it 13 with a truck terminal, and in addition to this 14 building which is essentially a connection point so 15 that all trucks go through this entry on Hackensack 16 Street, and adding we're extra parking. 17 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Can you 18 identify the drawing that you're referring to? 19 MR. JACOBS: I can get it from the 20 site plan engineer, if you want to get it from the 21 engineer. 22 MR. PORRO: Can you identify the 23 plan, and speak loud for the court reporter. Center 24 around the comments by Mr. Jacobs. 25 (The witness is sworn.) 44 1 MR. BECHT: State name and address 2 for the record, please. 3 MR. BUCHANAN: Seth Buchanan. 4 MR. PORRO: Sir, speak loud. The 5 court reporter needs to hear you. Seth, can 6 identify the plans that you're making reference to 7 and address the County Engineer's comments. 8 MR. BUCHANAN: This plan is titled 9 Site Exhibit, is based upon the site plans that were 10 submitted to the County and dated 4/07/2006. Just 11 to get to the comments on the top of the page, 12 again, to give a little more information -- 13 MR. PORRO: The reason we're here is 14 because the property is on Central, which is a 15 County Road? 16 MR. BUCHANAN: That's correct. 17 MR. JACOBS: An impact on Central 18 Avenue is what? 19 MR. BUCHANAN: As part of this 20 development, it's going to be closed from Central 21 Avenue. Existing assess will be removed. One 22 comment provided to the County Engineer to 23 facilitate was to install curb along the existing 24 curb cut that was provided at the -- for that site. 25 As Mr. Porro said, he would actually in case of 45 1 emergency prefer to use that as emergency access if 2 that ever happened. 3 MR. PORRO: And that design for the 4 emergency access would be pursuant to County codes? 5 MR. BUCHANAN: Sure. 6 MR. PORRO: And Mr. Jacobs has no 7 objection to that? 8 MR. JACOBS: (Nods.) 9 MR. PORRO: As far as the site 10 itself, is there any drainage that is going onto the 11 County facility? 12 MR. BUCHANAN: No, there isn't. 13 MR. PORRO: That is going to the town 14 of Kearny? 15 MR. BUCHANAN: Sure. 16 MR. PORRO: And those were the two 17 comments provided by the engineer? 18 MR. BUCHANAN: Yes. The third one 19 had to do with permits. We will definitely provide 20 all permits to the County. 21 MR. PORRO: We acknowledge the third 22 comment. Is there anything else the Board would be 23 like to address? Those are the County comments by 24 the engineer. 25 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Do you have 46 1 any comment? 2 MR. REIMON: No, I'd just like to see 3 the detail for the depressed curb and details for, I 4 guess, the repair of the County road to make sure 5 it's up to County standards. 6 MR. PORRO: Mr. Jacobs, that's okay? 7 MR. JACOBS: Yes, no objection. 8 COMMISSIONER JASEK: I have seen some 9 plans a few years ago, and construction was supposed 10 to start last year because of the DOT, but sooner or 11 later it was supposed to start. I don't know at 12 this point what impact this might have on that, on 13 the property. 14 MR. PORRO: I would think quite 15 positive because that area is zoned, or a permitted 16 use in the zone. The connections that are there are 17 commerce facilitated. This new development, we're 18 not aware of that. This project will be in 19 conformity with that. 20 COMMISSIONER JASEK: They didn't 21 start this project. It's something for information. 22 At this point I don't know at least traffic right 23 now it's by a highway, and if DOT gets $350 million 24 to put in a new bridge, that will be much easier in 25 that intersection, and not only for you. Do you 47 1 have any idea how many trucks you will have in and 2 out of this place? 3 MR. PORRO: Activity, Larry? 4 MR. JACOBS: I'm going to say two 5 times, but we're looking at something different. So 6 this location we're looking at a couple different 7 type of uses. The goods come in we send it right 8 back out at this location. We are currently 9 operating out of Allentown, Pennsylvania, and this 10 trucking operation that might make it busy. 11 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Your activity is 12 24/7? 13 MR. PORRO: That's an industrial area 14 near 1 & 9, the Turnpike. It's an existing truck 15 location, but we're taking off the entrance into the 16 County road and putting onto Hackensack Avenue, 17 which goes right onto the Turnpike extension. I 18 think Hackensack goes right into that. 19 MR. BUCHANAN: 1 & 9. 20 COMMISSIONER JASEK: It doesn't work 21 in there. I see a long line of trucks from all 22 entrances. The bridge is closed. Do you have any 23 idea how much traffic? 24 MR. JACOBS: The circulation would be 25 different. I don't know exactly what the traffic 48 1 will be. I anticipate it would be a while before we 2 fully can utilize the terminal, but it will probably 3 have a big turnaround. 4 MR. PORRO: Per day? 5 MR. JACOBS: Yes. 6 MR. PORRO: We have nothing further. 7 We are a permitted use. The only variance we have 8 here is the parking requirement, it's 127, I 9 believe. Seth, what's the number? Most people 10 driving in will be with a truck and driving out. 11 Because of the codes, we need how many spaces? 12 MR. BUCHANAN: 173. 13 MR. PORRO: 173 cars is ambitious for 14 a trucking terminal. 15 MR. BUCHANAN: We are providing 124. 16 MR. JACOBS: We have a small staff, 17 sales representatives. We have ten people, 20. 18 MR. REIMON: This is a question for 19 the site engineer. Are you going to consider banked 20 parking, in other words, show that you could provide 21 124, but come up with a number 20 or 24 that you 22 will actually build? 23 MR. BUCHANAN: We met with Langley 24 Engineering. This is the direction they had, so it 25 will be built out. 49 1 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Commissioner 2 Mehta. 3 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Is there any 4 type of, before you got the town approval, did you 5 do a traffic study? 6 MR. BUCHANAN: Yes. 7 COMMISSIONER JASEK: You have a large 8 building, how will you control the access from both 9 sides? 10 MR. BUCHANAN: You have a detail to 11 show the controlled gate that we're going to use to 12 control the access. The detail for Hackensack 13 Avenue, no, a sensor. 14 MR. PORRO: For emergency vehicles, a 15 lock box that emergency vehicles will be able to 16 use. You've used that at other facilities? 17 MR. JACOBS: Yes. 18 MR. PORRO: And there's no objection 19 to provide by the engineer? 20 MR. BUCHANAN: No. 21 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Do I have a 22 motion? 23 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, on a motion 24 to approve application SP-60-06, made by 25 Commissioner Choffo. Second by Commissioner 50 1 Fitzgibbons. 2 Commissioner Avagliano. 3 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: I vote aye. 4 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Choffo. 5 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Aye. 6 MR. MARKS: Commissioner DiDomenico. 7 COMMISSIONER DiDOMENICO: Aye. 8 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Fitzgibbons. 9 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 10 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Jasek. 11 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Aye. 12 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Mehta. 13 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 14 MR. MARKS: Chairwoman Bettinger. 15 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: I vote aye. 16 Good luck. 17 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, the last 18 application scheduled for public hearing is 19 SP-64-04, Roland Cribeiro located at 215-217 20 Manhattan Avenue, Union City. 21 MR. DIAZ: Good evening. Luis Diaz, 22 for the applicant. If I may, Mr. Arenciba testified 23 before the Board, as the architect when this 24 presentation was made by the Board of Adjustment of 25 the city of Union City. 51 1 MR. BECHT: Madam Chair, it's up to 2 your discretion. He's been here before. 3 MR. DIAZ: He was the architect on 4 the project. He made the presentation before the 5 Union City Board of Adjustment. He was also before 6 this Board. I would like to have him qualified as 7 an expert so he can testify. 8 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: That's fine. 9 (The witness is sworn.) 10 MR. BECHT: State your name and 11 address for the record. 12 MR. ARENCIBIA: Albert Arencibia, 13 A-r-e-n-c-i-b-i-a, 224 East 61st, West New York, New 14 Jersey. 15 MR. DIAZ: The application you have 16 before you is for a subdivision, two lots, 17 and 17 18, and 19 and 20 on Manhattan Avenue, and also, 18 across the street from those lots, two smaller lots, 19 7 and 8, and 9 and 10, also on Manhattan Avenue, on 20 the east side of Manhattan Avenue, subdivision of 21 those two big parcels, and the construction of two 22 four-family units on each one. 23 Mr. Arencibia, if you could go through the 24 plans and show the Board what it is. 25 MR. ARENCIBIA: The reason we're here 52 1 is because of the fact that we're proposing, what 2 happens is, two of the structures are going to be 3 built on two lots set off of Manhattan Avenue. 4 Manhattan Avenue happens to be at the end of the 5 bluff, so it's actually on the edge of a cliff. So 6 we're proposing to put in parking on that street 7 which goes onto Manhattan Avenue itself. It's 8 actually on the edge of the cliff. 9 Last month when I was here, I gave 10 testimony. We're providing a fence along the edge 11 of the parking, along Manhattan Avenue and putting 12 in concrete wheel guards so cars won't go over. 13 That is basically the reason why this application is 14 before the Board. The previous structure, one is 15 already built and inhabited already, and that was a 16 six-unit building, and now we're finishing up the 17 adjacent structure which is an eight-unit building. 18 This parking happens to be across the street on the 19 edge of the cliff. We will be providing parking 20 basically to go onto the street. Pretty much all of 21 the development on the entire block has actually the 22 same situation we're proposing on this application. 23 I believe the last time when I was here, 24 one of the requirements they had asked for was a 25 six-foot high fence. We're proposing to make it 53 1 look more attractive, we're putting down a 2 three-foot high fence, finished with stucco and 3 limestone capping and finished asphalt sloping onto 4 the street, basically, just to make it more 5 decorative, but that basically it. 6 MR. DIAZ: This whole street, which 7 is composed of two blocks, it goes from Second 8 Street all the way to 4th Street on this 9 intersection, have all been developed the same way 10 that this project is being developed, and again, 11 like the architect said, the parking is across the 12 street, same set up. 13 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Commissioner 14 Jasek, do you have any comments? 15 COMMISSIONER JASEK: I made the 16 comment about this fence. 17 MR. MARKS: For the record, Madam 18 Chair, this application, the application was 19 submitted plus the documents were submitted for a 20 site plan application only. The applicant 21 referenced a subdivision. We did not receive a 22 subdivision application nor the subdivision plats. 23 MR. DIAZ: The subdivision was 24 approved previously. This parcel was a 100-foot 25 parcel. It was first subdivided I think it was year 54 1 before that last, where Lot 17 and 18, that was the 2 first part of the project. This is the other side 3 of that parcel where it consists of Lot 19 and 20, 4 and you have there two four-families, an 5 eight-family project. 6 MR. MARKS: Mr. Diaz, did that 7 subdivision application get approved by this Board? 8 MR. DIAZ: I believe that was another 9 attorney who made that presentation. It did come 10 before this Board. 11 MR. MARKS: Do you know when it came 12 before the Board? 13 MR. DIAZ: I think it was the year 14 before last, 2004. 15 MR. BECHT: You are putting on the 16 record that this is a previously approved 17 subdivision, and what you're seeking is site plan 18 approval? 19 MR. DIAZ: That's correct. 20 MR. BECHT: Because I think you 21 started your presentation that you were seeking 22 subdivision approval. 23 MR. DIAZ: Maybe I misspoke. I was 24 trying to go back to what was done before. It was 25 100 x 100, it was subdivided, the first two lots 55 1 built. Now we're working on the second two lots. 2 MR. BECHT: Which has been previously 3 approved and subdivided. So the let the record 4 reflect that the applicant's attorney put on the 5 record that has been previously subdivided. The 6 application before this Board which is on file, is 7 specifically for site plan approval? 8 MR. DIAZ: Correct. 9 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: We 10 approved this year and a half ago? 11 MR. BECHT: There is a reference to a 12 resolution stating that the subdivision was approved 13 on such and such a date. 14 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Do we need 15 verification? 16 MR. BECHT: Obviously, approval would 17 be subject to confirmation that the previously 18 applied for subdivision is a fact. 19 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, we have a 20 pretty good database on all the applications in the 21 last six years. It will only take me a couple of 22 minutes tomorrow if indeed the subdivision was 23 indeed approved by this Board. 24 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Do you have 25 any other comments? Do you have a motion? 56 1 MR. BECHT: A motion to approve the 2 site plan, the application before the Board, subject 3 to a confirmation of a previously approved 4 subdivision. 5 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Do I have a 6 second? 7 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, on a motion 8 to approve SP-64-06, made by Commissioner 9 Fitzgibbons. Second by Commissioner Avagliano. 10 Commissioner Avagliano. 11 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: I vote aye. 12 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Choffo. 13 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Aye. 14 MR. MARKS: Commissioner DiDomenico. 15 COMMISSIONER DiDOMENICO: Aye. 16 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Fitzgibbons. 17 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 18 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Jasek. 19 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Aye. 20 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Mehta. 21 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 22 MR. MARKS: Chairwoman Bettinger. 23 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Aye. Thank 24 you very much. Have a night good. Next item on the 25 agenda is old business. 57 1 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, under old 2 business, we, as a Board, have been discussing an 3 Interlocal agreement with the Hudson County 4 Improvement Authority for sometime starting last 5 December. We drafted the actual language. It has 6 been bounced back and forth between the Improvement 7 Authority attorney and our attorney the last few 8 months. 9 But on the date of the last meeting of the 10 Planning Board, the Hudson County Improvement 11 Authority did approve an Interlocal agreement with 12 the Planning Board to do two things, one was to 13 provide services of the Improvement Authority 14 Inspector and go out and inspect previous 15 applications which were approved by this Board to 16 make sure that they were in compliance with the 17 conditions set forth by this Board before we return 18 any escrow fees that were lingering for that 19 applications. 20 It's not for applications that don't have 21 escrow fees. There are approximately a quarter of a 22 million dollars worth of escrow going back maybe ten 23 years from the Board and before anything was -- you 24 can't by law just accept it. Basically, since it is 25 in escrow to basically declare it for County 58 1 purposes, the money has to go back to the applicant, 2 but before we return a nickle, we want to make sure 3 that their projects were as per the recommendations 4 of this Board in order to return that money. That's 5 one. 6 The Hudson County Improvement Authority 7 does employ a number of inspectors. They have 8 enforcement authority powers specifically related to 9 solid waste. There is a particular inspector who is 10 going for his construction code official 11 certification. He has previous experience in the 12 Hoboken Construction Code Office, and he is 13 knowledgeable about building permits and 14 construction code. He'll be the main person making 15 the inspection, making reports to this body. 16 The Hudson County Improvement services 17 will be to use their County services essentially to 18 do the research, go back the ten years and close out 19 the accounts. That's something that by law you're 20 not supposed to hold onto money for X number of 21 years. I'm not sure what the length of time is. 22 They will reconcile everything and return unused 23 portions of those projects to their rightful 24 applicant. If the applicant was, per se, a 25 corporation, an LLC that was just formed for the 59 1 purpose of a development and no longer around, or if 2 it was a person who we can't get in touch with them, 3 the funds actually go to the State. In the case we 4 can't find the original applicant, the money will go 5 back to the State. The County doesn't have the 6 right to hold onto the funds. 7 So essentially this, the copy of the 8 Interlocal agreement was sent out in your packages a 9 couple weeks ago, also is a resolution that was 10 drafted by Tom Calvanico, the attorney, titled or 11 No. A-A01-6. I am reading it into the record. 12 Hudson County Planning Board Resolution, Resolution 13 No. A-701-06 S7, date adopted, July 19, 2006, title, 14 resolution approving an Interlocal service agreement 15 between the Hudson County Planning Board and Hudson 16 County Improvement Authority. 17 Whereas, the Hudson County Planning Board 18 requires inspection services as well as fiscal 19 monitoring services; and 20 Whereas, the Hudson County Improvement 21 Authority has the capability of providing these 22 services in a profession and cost-efficient manner; 23 and 24 Whereas, the Hudson County Improvement 25 Authority has, at its Regular Meeting conducted on 60 1 June 21, 2006, approved the agreement attached 2 hereto; and 3 Whereas, the maximum amount of the 4 contract is $75,000 for 2006, and shall be $45,000 5 for 2007; and 6 Whereas, funds for this purpose are 7 available in an account, which is basically an 8 escrow account for the County, as certified by the 9 Director of Planning; and 10 Whereas, the Local Public Contract Law, 11 N.J.S.A. 40A:11-1, et. seq., permits the entering of 12 an Interlocal agreement without public advertising 13 for bids and requires the resolution and the terms 14 to be available for public inspection. 15 Now, therefore, be it resolved by the 16 Hudson County Planning Board that the aforesaid 17 recitals are incorporated herein as though fully set 18 forth at length. The Board authorizes the Chairman 19 of the Planning Board to execute any and all 20 documents and take any and all actions necessary to 21 complete and realize the intent and purpose of this 22 resolution. The Chairman of the Planning Board is 23 hereby authorized to execute an agreement for the 24 above referenced services based on the following 25 information: Provider, the Hudson County 61 1 Improvement Authority, 574 Summit Avenue, Jersey 2 City, New Jersey 07306; Terms of contract, January 3 1, 2006 to December 31, 2007; contract amount, 4 $75,000 for 2006, $45,000 for 2007; source of 5 funding is the Planning Board escrow accounts. 6 The Planning Board hereby approves the 7 contract with the Hudson County Improvement 8 Authority for inspection services and fiscal 9 monitoring service for the terms stated above. 10 The Secretary of the Planning Board shall 11 publish a notice of this action. The resolution 12 shall take effect immediately. 13 Just let me answer one question that 14 Mr. Choffo had, the $75,000 includes specifically 15 for the first year, it's retroactive to the 16 beginning of this year because Mr. Tradenti has been 17 actively preparing reports with regard to current 18 pending applications as well as previous 19 applications, and the difference in the amounts, it 20 is assumed that the firm of that helps the Hudson 21 County Improvement Authority with their services are 22 daily solvent and are certified public accountants 23 who would do this work during the calendar year 24 2006. 25 In terms of looking, I believe, at last 62 1 count which is several months ago there were 185 2 line items of escrow, it's probably 200 by now. 3 Basically the difference in the dollar figure was 4 looking at retro -- not retro but looking at the old 5 escrow accounts versus proactively by the engineer 6 his maintaining and monitoring existing ongoing 7 escrow accounts and their other inspectors. 8 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Do we have an 9 approval? 10 MR. MARKS: We need a motion to 11 approve. 12 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: I have a 13 question. What happens if it goes through Hudson 14 County Planning Board to approve? 15 MR. MARKS: We will notify them. We 16 will work with Mr. Jasek. We will go back and have 17 been going back and referencing the site plan 18 applications, looking, Mr. Tradenti takes site plans 19 into the field to verify that they're consistent and 20 what has been built is consistent with the site plan 21 as submitted. He is referencing the minutes of 22 those transcripts from the meetings to make sure 23 they are consistent. If they're not consistent, we 24 would be weighing our options legally. 25 We would want to been in a position to 63 1 return the money, per se, in those escrow accounts, 2 especially if those applications were in compliance, 3 even if it takes letters from our Planning Board 4 attorney to the applicants or to the applicant's 5 attorney to get them to move and come into 6 compliance with our conditions, then we would be we 7 will be doing that. In one case, one severe case, a 8 large trucking firm on Secaucus Road, I think the 9 County is contemplating suing the applicant because 10 violations have been egregious, they have allowed 11 the conditions that were not approved by this Board. 12 Hopefully, no other application will come to that, 13 but that is a severe case. We have one particular 14 case we had been one working with the town of 15 Secaucus and the Meadowlands Commissioner to bring 16 them into compliance, but they can care less what 17 the Meadowlands district says. 18 COMMISSIONER JASEK: So what do we do 19 if there is a case we need to do something? We will 20 send the site inspector, and he goes to the site and 21 there's a violation? 22 MR. MARKS: If they are violations, 23 if the applicant or the applicants do open up the 24 street or do create a curb cut without County 25 Engineer approval, we can send out, I guess the 64 1 Sheriff's Department and have them -- however, if 2 again, it's they have done basically a road opening 3 or curb cut, and they haven't come before this Board 4 yet, at this point the most we can do is work with 5 the Municipal Building Inspector or Construction 6 Code Official and issue a stop work order. That's 7 proactive than retroactively where we have to have 8 our attorney contact them. 9 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Any other 10 questions? 11 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: I think at some 12 point we were thinking about hiring an accountant? 13 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, it was 14 originally thought when we had entertained or 15 discussed the issue and entertained the discussion 16 that we would create an RFP to bid for the 17 accounting services. However, one of the things 18 that the Improvement Authority offered was they 19 would rather have a working relationship between 20 their accountants and their inspectors. It's 21 basically an operation that preexists, and it made a 22 lot more sense to have their accountant and 23 bookkeepers working hand in gloves with their expert 24 rather than have a disjointed series of situations 25 to begin with. 65 1 We want to act expeditiously. If we were 2 to go the other route and hire accountants through 3 our RFP process, I think the process would take a 4 lot longer then. You would have go out to bid 5 through an open process, have to advertise. That's 6 done through the purchasing department, so they 7 would have to the comply with the regulations. They 8 are very competitive to begin with, and since we're 9 already on board with the Improvement Authority, 10 it's a lot easier to exercise one agreement with 11 Improvement Authority rather than multiple bidders. 12 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: So the term of 13 conflict of interest never came up? 14 MR. BECHT: The key to Interlocal 15 agreements, you are looking out for taxpayers' best 16 interest and saving money, and the interest is the 17 same to serve the public is there really -- you can 18 almost find a conflict interest in anything, but if 19 you use common sense and are acting in the 20 betterment of the general public economically, et 21 cetera, et cetera, theoretically the problem doesn't 22 exist. 23 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: I work for 24 the City of Hoboken. We have an agreement with the 25 Housing inspectors, sort of like the same situation. 66 1 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Do we have a 2 motion for the Hudson County Planning Board 3 resolution, Interlocal service agreement? 4 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, on a motion 5 to approve Resolution A-70-06 made by Commissioner 6 Fitzgibbons. Second by Commissioner Avagliano. 7 Commissioner Avagliano. 8 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: I vote aye. 9 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Choffo. 10 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Aye. 11 MR. MARKS: Commissioner DiDomenico. 12 COMMISSIONER DiDOMENICO: Aye. 13 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Fitzgibbons. 14 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 15 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Jasek. 16 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Aye. 17 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Mehta. 18 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 19 MR. MARKS: Chairwoman Bettinger. 20 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Aye. 21 MR. REIMON: Madam Chair, 22 Commissioners, can we leave? 23 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Yes, good 24 night. 25 MR. MARKS: Madam Chair, the next 67 1 order of business is a recommendation and revised 2 Planning Board Application Fee Schedule. In your 3 packets that were sent out a couple weeks ago as 4 discussed in the Site Plan Review Committee Meeting, 5 it's come to my attention and the Board's attention 6 that a lot of times the escrow deposits which are 7 submitted by applicant are not sufficient to cover 8 the cost of review, and the application fees haven't 9 been revised in almost ten years. The last time the 10 application fees were revised was in 1997, and to 11 keep up with the times, it's recommended that the 12 application fees and escrow deposits be updated. 13 In your packet, we tried to create more of 14 a nexus between the County Planning Board's 15 jurisdiction which is traffic and drainage and the 16 application fee. In your packet was the older 17 application fee which is kind of complex. A lot of 18 times an applicant and attorney, his engineer and 19 us, not on your two-family application on the 20 Boulevard, but larger, more complex applications, 21 four people would come up with four different 22 amounts for the application and escrow. So we tried 23 to simplify the process and come up with a 24 reasonable application fee as it's tied directly 25 into the number of parking spaces for a site 68 1 development or the square footage of impervious 2 surface. The nexus of the traffic and drainage 3 obviously is parking spaces to traffic, impervious 4 coverage to stormwater runoff drainage, in regard to 5 the number of units, or number of square feet for 6 commerce or industrial, but it is important for the 7 Planning Board -- County Planning Board to consider 8 traffic and drainage. 9 Two other things, it also included, so 10 it's not combined but it's segregated, I guess, the 11 application fee -- the escrow deposit rather, would 12 include a new category for inspections, so the 13 review fee by either our engineer in-house or 14 consulting engineer would be separate from the 15 escrow deposit which is submitted to go out and 16 verify the maintenance or performance of a site or 17 inspection of a site, and then the beauty for that 18 that is any unused escrow goes back to applicant. 19 So if you have a two-part escrow deposit. 20 Once the review is done, any unused funds goes back 21 to applicant and doesn't have to be tied up with a 22 performance and maintenance escrow deposit. That 23 would be done once the project is completed, and it 24 could be $100 and/or $1,000. They know at the end 25 of the day that their site is going to be inspected. 69 1 If they are in compliance, whatever remaining funds 2 are available, they will get back. It was important 3 that these inspections and performance escrow 4 deposits weren't commingled with the other deposits. 5 There is another thing. There is more of 6 a push to incorporate green building standards into 7 local plan reviews. The Meadowlands Commissioner is 8 incorporating U.S. Green Building Council 9 certification, so leadership in environmental 10 excellence to basically try to get efficiency of 11 applications and developments as well as reducing 12 stormwater runoff and traffic and reusing 13 Brownfields, and so by way of reference, I think 14 there was a scorecard included in the packet to see 15 what the different categories are. Applications 16 achieve basically a bonus or a way to reward 17 applicants who achieve a silver certification will 18 pay a 50-percent application fee. Those achieving 19 gold certification would achieve a 75-percent 20 reduction in application fee, not the escrow 21 deposit. That money is returned anyhow. Anybody 22 achieving a platinum status, their application fee 23 would be waived. 24 I think it's important for the County to 25 go in that direction with the talk of local climate 70 1 change, reducing our dependence on foreign oil. 2 It's important to incorporation things that's set 3 forth into our local codes. So this recognizes and 4 rewards applications who try to achieve that. 5 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: Any questions? 6 COMMISSIONER JASEK: How does this 7 compare to the other counties? 8 MR. MARKS: There's one town, I 9 believe, I'm not sure if I put it in the article or 10 the actual ordinance, Cranford or Clark incorporated 11 and requires their applicants or applications to 12 comply with these standard. No other counties that 13 I know are doing this yet. However, the New Jersey 14 Meadowlands Commission, which includes part of 15 Jersey City, North Bergen, Secaucus and a portion of 16 Kearny, are moving toward this and strongly 17 encouraging applicants before the Meadowlands 18 Commission to subscribe to the standards. I think 19 we would be cutting edge. It's not required but it 20 recognizes and rewards applicants who try to achieve 21 it. 22 If it's okay, we can vote and table it for 23 further discussion or deliberation, it's up to you. 24 This needs Freeholder approval. It's not something 25 this subject to the Planning Board. If voted 71 1 tonight it will go to the Freeholder Board for their 2 acceptance of your recommendations. If you want to 3 table it, that's fine by me. 4 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: I have a 5 problem voting on it absent a few outspoken voices 6 on the Board. 7 MR. MARKS: I think it's a good 8 thing. It simplifies the fee schedules. It's 9 cutting edge. We can be the leader of state in 10 terms of energy efficiency. 11 Madam Chair, the resolution is referred to 12 as A-702-06. Motion to approve Resolution A-702-06 13 made by Commissioner Fitzgibbons. Seconded by 14 Commissioner Avagliano. 15 Commissioner Avagliano. 16 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: I vote aye. 17 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Choffo. 18 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Aye. 19 MR. MARKS: Commissioner DiDomenico. 20 COMMISSIONER DiDOMENICO: Aye. 21 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Fitzgibbons. 22 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 23 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Jasek. 24 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Aye. 25 MR. MARKS: Commissioner Mehta. 72 1 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 2 MR. MARKS: Chairwoman Bettinger. 3 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: It has to 4 appear before the Freeholder. I vote aye. 5 MR. MARKS: The motion passes. 6 CHAIRWOMAN BETTINGER: We have 7 nothing else on the agenda. Next meeting schedule 8 for August 16, 2006. Do I have to motion to 9 adjourn? 10 (There being no further matters 11 before the Board, the Chairwoman adjourns the 12 meeting, and the proceeding is then concluded at 13 8:39 p.m.) 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 73 1 C E R T I F I C A T I O N 2 3 4 5 6 7 I, SHARI CATHEY, a Notary Public and 8 Shorthand Reporter of the State of New Jersey, 9 hereby certify that the proceedings herein are from 10 the notes taken by me of a Regular Meeting of the 11 Hudson County Planning Board, held on Wednesday, 12 July 19, 2006; and that this is a correct transcript 13 of the same. 14 15 16 ___________________________ 17 SHARI CATHEY, S.R. A NOTARY PUBLIC of the 18 State of New Jersey I.D. No. 2283786 19 Commission Expires 2/4/07 20 21 22 23 24 25