- 1 - 1 HUDSON COUNTY PLANNING BOARD 2 RE: ) 3 ) MONTHLY MEETING ) TRANSCRIPT OF 4 ) ) PROCEEDINGS: 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - ) 6 County Annex Building 567 Pavonia Avenue 7 Freeholders Chambers, 3rd Floor Jersey City, New Jersey 07306 8 Wednesday, April 18, 2007 6:30 pm 9 B E F O R E: 10 JUDE FITZGIBBONS, Chairman 11 STEPHEN D. MARKS, Secretary 12 RUSHABH MEHTA, Commissioner 13 MARY E. AVAGLIANO, Commissioner 14 RENEE BETTINGER, Commissioner 15 DOREEN DIDOMENICO, Commissioner 16 KENNEDY NG, Commissioner 17 BOB JASEK, Commissioner 18 19 ALSO PRESENT: 20 THOMAS P. CALVANICO, ESQ., Board Attorney 21 Reported By: 22 MARK WEINBERG 23 REPORTING SERVICES ARRANGED THROUGH VERITEXT/NEW JERSEY REPORTING COMPANY 24 25B Vreeland Road, Suite 301 Florham Park, New Jersey 07932 25 Tel No.: (973) 410-4040 Fax: (973) 410-1313 - 2 - 1 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: -- open 2 the regular session of the Hudson County Planning 3 Board. Has the media been notified? 4 MR. MARKS: Yes, Mr. Chairman. 5 The meeting has been appropriately advertised. It's 6 been posted on the board at the Board of Freeholders 7 and on the board at the County Clerk's Office, in 8 accordance with the law. 9 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Please 10 rise and salute the flag. 11 (Pledge of Allegiance is recited) 12 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Roll call 13 of officers. 14 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 15 Avagliano? 16 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Here 17 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 18 Bettinger. 19 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: Here. 20 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 21 DiDomenico is not present. Commissioner Dublin is 22 not present. Commissioner Fitzgibbons? 23 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Here. 24 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 25 Jasek? - 3 - 1 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Present. 2 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 3 Holloway is not present. Commissioner Mehta? 4 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Here. 5 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 6 NG? 7 8 COMMISSIONER NG: Here. 9 SECRETARY MARKS: Chairman 10 Chaffo is not present. Mr. Chairman, we have a 11 quorum. 12 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Reading 13 of -- have all the commissioners received their 14 minutes? 15 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: Yes. 16 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Do we 17 have a motion to accept the minutes as read? 18 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Motion 19 to accept. 20 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: I'll 21 second the motion. 22 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 23 on a motion to accept the minutes made by 24 Commissioner Avagliano, seconded by Commissioner 25 Bettinger. Commissioner Avagliano? - 4 - 1 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 2 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 3 Bettinger? 4 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: Aye. 5 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 6 Fitz -- I'm sorry. Commissioner Jasek? 7 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Aye. 8 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 9 Mehta? 10 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Abstain. 11 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 12 Ng? 13 COMMISSIONER NG: Abstain, I was 14 absent last night. 15 SECRETARY MARKS: Chairman 16 Fitzgibbons? 17 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 18 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 19 the motion passed. 20 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: The site 21 plans and subdivisions applications. 22 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 23 the memorialization of resolutions approved at last 24 meeting beginning with the Municipal Stone Water 25 Management plan -03MSNP-03 for the Town of Secaucus, - 5 - 1 site plan application number 0807 for Redbook Park 2 LLC located on Cape May Street, block 174, lot 1.01 3 in the town of Harrison. Site plan and subdivision 4 application 1407 for Carlos Dan Niveon located at 5 910 Palisade Avenue, Block 186, lot 132 in the City 6 of Union City. Subdivision 18-07 by the House and 7 Redevelopment Agency located at 600 Cape May Street, 8 block 174, lot 1.01 in the Town of Harrison. And 9 SD-24-07 Franklin Development Group located at 268- 10 282 Martin Luther King Drive in the City of Jersey 11 City. 12 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Do we 13 have a motion to approve? 14 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: I'll 15 make a motion to approve. 16 COMISSIONER MEHTA: I second. 17 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 18 on a motion to approve made by Commissioner 19 Bettinger, seconded by Commissioner Mehta. 20 Commissioner Avagliano? 21 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 22 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 23 Bettinger? 24 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: Aye. 25 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner - 6 - 1 Jasek? 2 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Aye. 3 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 4 Mehta? 5 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 6 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 7 Ng? 8 COMMISSIONER NG: Aye. 9 SECRETARY MARKS: Chairman 10 Fitzgibbons? 11 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 12 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 13 the motion passed. 14 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: 15 Applications declared to be exempt. 16 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 17 the application declared to be exempt this evening 18 is SP-26-07, Lewis Carbiro (phonetic), Applicant. 19 Located at 5501-5505 Hudson Avenue which is block 20 81, lot 9 in the Town of West New York. 21 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Do we 22 have a motion to approve? 23 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: I make a 24 motion. 25 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: I'll - 7 - 1 second the motion. 2 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, on a 3 motion to approve made by Commissioner Mehta, 4 seconded by Commissioner Bettinger. Commissioner 5 Avagliano? 6 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 7 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 8 Bettinger? 9 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: Aye. 10 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 11 Jasek? 12 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Aye. 13 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 14 Mehta? 15 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 16 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 17 Ng? 18 COMMISSIONER NG: Aye. 19 SECRETARY MARKS: Chairman 20 Fitzgibbons? 21 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 22 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 23 the motion passed. 24 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Site 25 plans and subdivisions applications. - 8 - 1 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 2 the first application scheduled for public hearing 3 this evening is the Municipal Stonewater Management 4 Plan MSMP-04 for the Township of North Bergen. 5 MR. FORDHAM: Good evening 6 everyone. My name is Jim Fordham. I represent the 7 firm of Boswell and Clave Engineering and I'm here 8 on behalf of the Township of North Bergen. I was 9 involved in preparing the Stonewater Management Plan 10 and I aided in the Stonewater Control Ordinance. I 11 believe that the -- everyone here should have a copy 12 of this plan. I do have a couple extras if you 13 don't. I did receive a letter with some comments 14 from the county's consulting firm that was dated 15 March 28, 2007. And the township fully intends to 16 comply with the comments that were made. 17 I guess I'm here to answer any questions 18 that anybody might have regarding this plan. I 19 wasn't aware that we had to make a full presentation 20 to the county at this time. But I'm here to address 21 any comments, any questions that anybody might have. 22 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman? 23 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Yes. 24 SECRETARY MARKS: We have Rose 25 Santos from the firm of T & M who prepared the - 9 - 1 comment letter on behalf of the county. 2 MS. SANTOSE: Good evening, my 3 name is Rose Santos from T & M Associates. As you 4 are aware, we've been working with the county to 5 conduct a technical review of the Municipal 6 Stonewater Management Plan. Upon receipt of the 7 township's plan we forwarded a comment letter to 8 Stephen Marks on March 28th outlining some minor 9 comments both on the plan and the ordinance. Based 10 on testimony, I guess, given today by the township, 11 they're going to comply with our comments and 12 they'll be required to resubmit the revised plan. 13 At this time, I suggest that the county issue a 14 conditional approval subject to addressing the 15 comments. And then the town will have 180 days to 16 comply with the comments and then they'll resubmit 17 for formal approval. Any questions? 18 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: 19 Commissioner Jasek? 20 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Mr. 21 Chairman, I have no comment. I fully trust our 22 consultant because they are expert in this field. 23 So, whatever they comment -- I read the comment, I 24 do agree with it. 25 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, - 10 - 1 just besides the comment letter from T & M I would 2 just -- it's stated in my letter to the township 3 but, the New Jersey Department of Environmental 4 protection actually looks for street sweeping 5 records for county roads. And under and in a local 6 agreement between the county in each town, in this 7 case the Township of North Bergen, the township took 8 over the responsibility for street sweeping on 9 Kennedy Boulevard and other county roads within the 10 township. So, I would just add -- like to ask the 11 applicant, on the record, to not at this time but at 12 some point in the future when the DEP calls upon us 13 to furnish those records to help facilitate those 14 records and that request. 15 MR. FORDHAM: I will relay that 16 information to the township. This is -- 17 MR. BRUNO: Frank Bruno from 18 North Bergen Municipal Utilities Authority. 19 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Can you 20 swear him in? 21 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Just 22 spell your last name. 23 MR. BRUNO: B-R-U-N-O. 24 (Frank Bruno is duly sworn) 25 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Mr. - 11 - 1 Bruno, would you speak into the mike. 2 MR. BRUNO: Speak into the 3 microphone, okay. We are working with the 4 Department of Public Works at this time. And 5 everything that you are asking for, for the sweeper 6 records from the county is being put together as we 7 speak, with all the records updating from the 8 sweepers, the leave removal, anything that was being 9 done on the county roads, even including the 10 labeling of the storm systems. That will be all 11 presented in one complete package. 12 MR. FORDHAM: Great. Thank you 13 very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. 14 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Has any 15 commissioner have anything to say? Would someone 16 make a motion, please? 17 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: I'll 18 make a motion to approve. 19 COMMISSIONER JASEK: I second 20 the motion. 21 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: 22 Additionally approve? Additionally approve. 23 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: On the 24 motion to conditionally approve. 25 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, - 12 - 1 on a motion to conditionally approve MSMP-04 made by 2 Commissioner Bettinger, seconded by Commissioner 3 Jasek. Commissioner Avagliano? 4 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 5 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 6 Bettinger? 7 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: Aye. 8 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 9 Jasek? 10 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Aye. 11 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 12 Mehta? 13 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 14 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 15 Ng? 16 COMMISSIONER NG: Aye. 17 SECRETARY MARKS: Chairman 18 Fitzgibbons? 19 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 20 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 21 the motion passed. 22 MR. FORDHAM: Thank you very 23 much. 24 MR. BRUNO: Thank you. 25 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Can we - 13 - 1 call the next item on the agenda? 2 SECRETARY MARKS: Sure. Mr. 3 Chairman, the next application scheduled for public 4 hearing is SP-103-06, Vito Lanzone, Jr., applicant, 5 for a property located at 2109-2127 Kennedy 6 Boulevard which is block 43, lots 45, 46 and 47 in 7 the Township of North Bergen. 8 MR. VENINO: Mr. Chairman, 9 members of the committee, Thomas M. Venino, attorney 10 for Vito Lanzone on this application. This 11 application has been approved by the Township of 12 North Bergen and I've filed the architectural 13 drawings with the board. Unless there are some 14 questions with respect to that I would proceed to 15 the other issues which are -- to be covered by Mr. 16 Schrager of Mazer Engineering with respect to the 17 items that were enumerated in the board's letter. 18 Does the -- do you want to hear anything from the 19 architect or are you satisfied with the plans as 20 presented? 21 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: We would 22 like to hear from the architect. 23 MR. VENINO: All right. 24 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Could you 25 swear him in? - 14 - 1 COMMISSIONER CALVANICO: Please 2 have the witness -- just state your name, spell your 3 last name. 4 MR. FERNANDEZ: My name is 5 Fernando Fernandez, F-E-R-N-A-N-D-E-Z. 6 (Fernando Fernandez is duly sworn) 7 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Proceed. 8 MR. VENINO: Mr. Fernandez, 9 you're an architect in the State of New Jersey? 10 MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, I am. 11 MR. VENINO: Are you a member of 12 the AIA? 13 MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, I am. 14 MR. VENINO: Can you state your 15 qualifications for the board, please? 16 MR. FERNANDEZ: Registered 17 architect in the State of New Jersey, New York, 18 Connecticut. I've been a registered architect since 19 1982. I'm the principle owner of Fernandez 20 Architects since 1986. We have been performing 21 architectural services as a firm for twenty-one 22 years. 23 MR. VENINO: That seems to be 24 all right. 25 MR. FERNANDEZ: Thank you. - 15 - 1 MR. VENINO: Thank you. Mr. 2 Fernandez, you prepared plans for the demolition of 3 a one-story building at 2109 Kennedy Boulevard in 4 North Bergen and for the change in use and occupancy 5 of a two-story masonry building and the one story 6 building at 2119 through 2127, is that correct? 7 MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes. 8 MR. VENINO: And are these the 9 plans you've prepared? 10 MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes. 11 MR. VENINO: And their date? 12 MR. FERNANDEZ: Dated -- 13 revision dated April 24, 2006. 14 MR. VENINO: Would you please 15 put this on the easel and explain to the board the 16 extent of your involvement in this project. 17 MR. FERNANDEZ: We were the 18 architects of record for this project. Basically 19 what exists at the site now is two structures -- two 20 independent structures. One of them will be 21 demolished and will make room for a parking area 22 along the west side of the property. We're 23 proposing to have parking along the west and the 24 east side of the property which contains a two- 25 storey masonry part of the structure and a one-story - 16 - 1 masonry building. That will be converted into 2 commercial use. Right now the one -- one of the 3 buildings, the building that we're going to 4 demolish, is empty. It was occupied up to last year 5 as a tire repair shop. And the other two -- the 6 other building that is on the east side is 7 personally used as an auto parts sales building. 8 What we're proposing to do is renovate the 9 existing building, the first and second floors, and 10 turn them into commercial stores for retail. And 11 we're planning to have one of the uses as a Dunkin 12 Donuts along the western side of the -- this two- 13 story building. 14 We presented this to the North Bergen 15 Zoning Board and it was approved last year with some 16 minor conditions which we -- we took care of. Some 17 of the conditions were, they wanted us to stucco all 18 of the existing exterior walls along the north side 19 of the existing building and the east side, which we 20 will do. And that was it. They approved the 21 parking as we presented it to them. The landscaping 22 plan that we presented was also approved. And that 23 was our approval. 24 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Bob, do 25 we have anything on that? - 17 - 1 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Is there 2 any access or driveway from Kennedy Boulevard? 3 MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, we're 4 proposing a driveway from Kennedy Boulevard to the 5 parking spaces. 6 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Was there 7 an existing driveway at that location? 8 MR. FERNANDEZ: There's an 9 existing driveway there now, but we're going to 10 basically abandon that driveway because it's very 11 narrow. And we're going to -- we're proposing a new 12 driveway along the west side of the property, a 13 larger driveway. 14 COMMISSIONER JASEK: I See. Are 15 there any environmental issues in that former 16 garage? 17 MR. FERNANDEZ: Not that I'm 18 aware of. 19 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Okay. 20 Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 21 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: I got a 22 question, how would it affect the traffic? Are you 23 going to be pulling into that -- to the Dunkin 24 Donuts and pulling out, right? 25 MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, basically - 18 - 1 we -- the parking spaces that we're proposing would 2 have the -- the cars would go into the parking 3 lot and have enough space to turn around and come 4 out head first into Kennedy Boulevard. We're 5 proposing parking for fifteen spaces. 6 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: 7 Chairman, we have some comments from our special 8 projects manager concerning the traffic, should be 9 directed to be a right turn in and a right turn out 10 only. Mr. Tridente. 11 MR. TRIDENTE: I'm concerned. 12 You're not showing us on your diagram the traffic 13 configuration. 14 MR. FERNANDEZ: Yeah, we're 15 basically showing on the site plan, on sheet SD-1, a 16 right-hand turn sign in the plans. So, this is how 17 we presented it to the City of North Bergen and they 18 approved it. The only way to come in -- to come out 19 of the property is a right-hand turn into Kennedy 20 Boulevard. And logically, someone that's heading 21 north on Kennedy Boulevard would turn right into the 22 property. As far as putting a sign of no left turn 23 from Kennedy Boulevard, I don't think anyone's ever 24 going to see it driving on the Kennedy Boulevard 25 side. But there is a solid line there in front of - 19 - 1 our property so it would be against the law to make 2 a left turn on that -- into that driveway. 3 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: People 4 usually don't obey those lines. They make their own 5 way in. That's what -- I guess, that's what Mr. 6 Tridente is worried about, them crossing into it. 7 MR. TRIDENTE: I would recommend 8 having a no left-hand turn sign. 9 MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay. If the 10 board requests that and tells us where they would 11 like us to locate it, we'd be more than happy to put 12 it into the -- into the property. 13 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Mr. 14 Jasek, do you have any problem with that? 15 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Well, for 16 any commercial establishment on J.F. Kennedy 17 Boulevard we require right in, right out. For 18 similar establishment, especially the one just north 19 on 26th Street, we had to install the -- the 20 delineators and the double yellow line because 21 nobody obeys the sign. So if this should be the 22 case then we would ask the applicant to do the same 23 thing. 24 MR. TRIDENTE: Will the parking 25 spaces be designated only for the Dunkin Donuts or - 20 - 1 also for the commercial space? 2 MR. FERNANDEZ: Generally 3 they're -- they're not going to be assigned to 4 anyone. So, it's parking for the whole facility. I 5 also have to remind the board, which we did to the 6 City of North Bergen, that right now there's a curve 7 cut along the whole front end of this property and 8 we're basically going to turn that curve cut -- 9 we're going to remove that curve cut and the city is 10 proposing to have meter parking there. So we're 11 turning over to the community parking spaces. 12 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: On 13 Kennedy Boulevard? 14 MR. FERNANDEZ: On Kennedy 15 Boulevard. 16 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Would 17 they have to get permission from the county, being 18 that's a road, Mr. Jasek? 19 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Well, once 20 this board approves the site plan, then the 21 contractor who will actually physically remove that 22 driveway and build a new curb has to get a permit 23 from the county, yes. 24 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Steve? 25 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, - 21 - 1 two points. I believe, and Mr. Jasek can correct me 2 if I'm wrong. The double yellow line is for no 3 passing, it's not for no left turn, correct Mr. 4 Jasek? 5 COMMISSIONER JASEK: That's 6 correct. 7 SECRETARY MARKS: So it's not 8 illegal -- just because a double yellow line is down 9 a road doesn't mean it's illegal to make a left-hand 10 turn; it's just for no passing purposes only. And 11 also, we have Mr. Reimon here from Adina Consultants 12 who prepared a comment letter. I think it would be 13 appropriate for Mr. Reimon to bring up his comments. 14 MR. REIMON: Edwin Reimon from 15 Adina Consultants. Yes, we prepare a comment letter 16 for this application. And at the same time we 17 received revised plans dated April 13, 2007. And 18 also we received a letter from Mazer Consulting 19 Engineers. The plans and the letter address the 20 comments that we issued in our letter dated March, I 21 believe -- January 3, 2007. 22 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: So, you 23 feel that its -- 24 MR. REIMON: I feel that the 25 application is complete. - 22 - 1 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Okay. 2 Then -- then we should make a motion to move the 3 application. Does somebody want to make a motion? 4 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: I have 5 a couple of questions. 6 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: On the 7 motion, then? 8 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: What -- 9 what -- did we agree -- on the motion, right? 10 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: On the 11 motion, go ahead. 12 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: Are 13 we -- do we want them to install barriers? 14 COMMISSIONER JASEK: No, I 15 wouldn't recommend it at this time. What they have 16 to install, the sign on their property no left turn 17 on the exit from their parking lot. And we should 18 make a condition that if this is not obeyed by their 19 clients then we will ask them to install the 20 delineators along the center line of the J.F.K. 21 Boulevard. 22 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: We could 23 approve this -- on the motion, is anybody going 24 to -- does anybody want to make the motion? 25 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Mr. - 23 - 1 Chairman, I make a motion to approve the application 2 103-06 with a condition that the applicant will not 3 allow the left turn out from the property and if 4 this is violated by his customers he will, at his 5 expense, install the delineators along the center 6 line of J.F.K. Boulevard. 7 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: I'll 8 second the motion. 9 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 10 on a motion due to conditionally approve application 11 SP-103-06 with the conditions set forth by the 12 county engineer, seconded by Commissioner Bettinger. 13 Commissioner Avagliano? 14 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 15 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 16 Bettinger? 17 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: Aye. 18 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 19 Jasek? 20 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Aye. 21 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 22 Mehta? 23 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 24 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 25 Ng? - 24 - 1 COMMISSIONER NG: Aye. 2 SECRETARY MARKS: Chairman 3 Fitzgibbons. 4 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: I 5 approve, but make sure you get the proper permits 6 from the county. 7 MR. VENINO: Understood. 8 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 9 the motion passed. 10 MR. VENINO: Thank you, Mr. 11 Chairman. 12 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 13 the next application scheduled for public hearing is 14 SP-01-07, Liberty Park at Union City LLC located at 15 38th Street and Hackensack Plank Road which is block 16 260, lots 30 through 36 in the City of Union City. 17 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Mr. Chairman, 18 Brown M. Chewcaskie on behalf of the applicant, 19 Liberty Park at Union City LLC. With me this 20 evening I have two witnesses, David Beesley from 21 McDell Engineering and Stuart Gordon from Pennoni 22 Associates, the traffic consultant. This project 23 was approved by the Union City Board of Adjustment. 24 It is a sixty-three unit, ten story multi-family 25 residential building located on 38th Street. There - 25 - 1 are three parking levels associated with that 2 building. 3 We have received; form Mr. Marks, a 4 comment letter dated April 5, 2007. The applicant 5 can comply with those comments. We also received, 6 which was attached to that, a report from Mr. Klein 7 of T & M Associates, which is also dated April 5th 8 which raised certain concerns with respect to storm 9 water and traffic. I believed we've discussed those 10 with Mr. Klein but I have testimony this evening in 11 order to address those specific concerns. So if I 12 may proceed on that note? 13 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: You can 14 present your witnesses. 15 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Thank you, Mr. 16 Chairman. Mr. Beesley? 17 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Can you 18 swear him in? 19 MR. CALVANICO: Just please 20 spell your name for the record. 21 MR. BEESLEY: David Beesley, B- 22 E-E-S-L-E-Y. 23 MR. CALVANICO: Thank you, Mr. 24 Beesley. 25 (David Beesley is duly sworn) - 26 - 1 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Mr. Chairman, 2 Mr. Beesley regularly appears before this board, can 3 we dispense with his qualifications? 4 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Yes. 5 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Thank you, Mr. 6 Chairman. Mr. Beesley, just briefly describe the 7 project for the board and then we'll get into Mr. 8 Klein's report, please. 9 MR. BEESLEY: All right. This 10 is a -- it's located right on the corner of 38th and 11 Bergen Turnpike. Presently it's a vacant lot. 12 What's proposed is a residential building covering, 13 I forget the percentage. I'll say eighty or ninety 14 percent. It's less -- something like that, seventy, 15 eighty percent. We have some -- we have some 16 landscaping along the east and south side. There 17 are three levels of -- of parking. There's an 18 entrance off of Bergen Turnpike. You enter into the 19 lowest level of parking. You have to go up one 20 level to the exit on 38th Street. 21 Under the ramp we do have a storm water 22 management system. It is a detention basin and we 23 have some water quality features in here and we 24 discharge out to the existing storm system. The 25 comments from T & M really back that up. They - 27 - 1 recognize that the -- the system meets the RSIS 2 requirements, Residential Site Improvement 3 Standards. We are also proposing some new curb and 4 sidewalk around the property. We will add a note 5 that the -- the existing inlet is to be cleaned to 6 make sure it is properly functioning. 7 We have design for the various storm 8 events to be treated, and again, in accordance with 9 the DEP regulations and RSIS. 10 There was one comment regarding -- there 11 are two sewers in 38th Street. This is actually 12 within the jurisdiction of the North Hudson Sewage 13 Authority but ultimately goes to the North Bergen 14 Sewage Authority. So we basically have dual 15 jurisdiction. We at McDell Engineering don't really 16 care which pipe we go into, they both seem to 17 function well. It's just a matter of jurisdiction - 18 - who has the jurisdiction on it and whether they 19 prefer. Both -- both sewers go downstream and 20 combine into a storm/sanitary. It doesn't matter 21 which one we connect to. We're happy with either 22 one of them. So, we will comply with that comment. 23 Next one simply says that it is a combined 24 system and we're not aware of any negative impacts 25 as a result of this. We are detaining the storm - 28 - 1 water, we are holding it, we are letting it out at a 2 lower rate and that's about it. 3 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Mr. Beesley, 4 basically is there anything that the applicant, with 5 the respect to the comments of Mr. Marks and the 6 comments of Mr. Klein from T & M, with respect to 7 drainage that couldn't be complied with? 8 MR. BEESLEY: No, we have 9 complied with it all. 10 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Okay. Thank 11 you, Mr. Beesley. 12 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: On the 13 record, we have another commissioner to show. 14 SECRETARY MARKS: Oh, I'm sorry. 15 I forgot. Commissioner DiDomenico. 16 COMMISSIONER DIDOMENICO: 17 Present. 18 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Mr. Chairman, 19 that's all I had for Mr. Beesley, unless there are 20 any questions from the board. 21 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Do we 22 have any questions? 23 MR. KLEIN: Lee Klein with T & M 24 Associates. No, the applicant said they'll comply 25 with everything. They've gone through all the - 29 - 1 comments. I think one other comment of 2.2 was 2 about proposed top and bottom of curb elevations. 3 You can provide that on the plan. I don't know if 4 the -- 5 MR. BEESLEY: We can comply with 6 that, provide those elevations. 7 MR. KLEIN: And the only other 8 thing was about the separate storm and sanitary 9 sewer, if they still need to be kept separate. I 10 don't know if Mr. Jasek has a chairman on that. 11 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Mr. 12 Chairman, I would prefer if they connect into the 13 storm because if any time in the future they will 14 decide to split it, it will be much easier. If you 15 connect into the storm right now -- into that 16 thirty-six -- 17 MR. BEESLEY: No, there's either 18 a sixteen or an eighteen. 19 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Whichever 20 is the storm? 21 MR. BEESLEY: Both of them. We 22 have separate laterals coming out from the building, 23 which is required. Those separate laterals, one is 24 for storm, one is for sanitary. 25 COMMISSONER JASEK: Okay. - 30 - 1 MR. BEESLEY: You want both of 2 those laterals connected to the -- 3 COMMISSIONER JASEK: No, no. 4 You connect the sanitary into the sanitary and storm 5 into the storm. 6 MR. BEESLEY: Okay. 7 COMMISSIONER JASEK: So in 8 future if the -- 9 MR. BEESLEY: Understood. 10 COMMISSIONER JASEK: -- North 11 Hudson decide to split it, it will be split already 12 from your project. 13 MR. BEESLEY: Again, subject to 14 what the -- either North Hudson or North Bergen 15 Sewage Authorities dictate. 16 COMMISSIONER JASEK: That's 17 correct. As you know, North Bergen is eliminating 18 the plant on Riverside Avenue into which your water 19 will eventually come, and they're going to pump it 20 to Jersey City Sewage Authority. And Jersey City 21 will pump it to Passaic Valley, across the river. 22 MR. BEESLEY: Nobody wants it. 23 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Right. At 24 one point Passaic Valley will probably insist on 25 some kind of splitting storm and sanitary. - 31 - 1 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Mr. Chairman, 2 there were also some comments from Mr. Klein on the 3 traffic report. I have Mr. Gordon to testify as to 4 that. Mr. Gordon? 5 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Could you 6 swear him in? 7 MR. CALVANICO: Please state 8 your name; spell your last name for the record. 9 MR. GORDON: Stuart Gordon, G-O- 10 R-D-O-N. 11 (Mr. Gordon is duly sworn) 12 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Mr. Gordon, 13 could you briefly provide the board with your 14 qualifications? 15 MR. GORDON: Okay. I'm a 16 professional engineer in the State of New Jersey. 17 I've been a registered professional engineer since 18 1992. I've done numerous traffic impact studies 19 throughout the State of New Jersey. I have 20 testified before this board on another matter. And 21 I've testified in front of other boards throughout 22 New Jersey. 23 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Mr. Gordon, 24 Pennoni Associates prepared the traffic report which 25 was submitted to this board, correct? - 32 - 1 MR. GORDON: That's correct. 2 MR. CHEWCASKIE: And we have 3 received comments from T & M Associates relative to 4 that report? 5 MR. GORDON: Yes. 6 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Can you respond 7 to those comments that we received, please, Mr. 8 Gordon? 9 MR. GORDON: The first comment 10 was regarding the traffic counts that were 11 collected. We had collected data in July of 2005, 12 which is during non-school season. We went back a 13 year later in June of '06 and counted the 14 intersections of -- the same intersections again in 15 those six when schools were in session, between the 16 hours of 7 to 9 and 4 to 9 p.m. at Bergen Turnpike 17 and the intersections of 37th and 38th Streets. Mr. 18 Klein raised the fact that in our report we 19 indicated that the traffic volumes between the two 20 years were consistent and want us to elaborate on 21 that. I did not prepare the original report. It 22 was prepared by another professional engineer who is 23 no longer with Pennoni Associates. But I reviewed 24 the traffic data within the project file and 25 determined that the traffic counts indeed were not - 33 - 1 consistent as indicated by Mr. Klein. 2 The June of '06 data that was collected 3 with schools in sessions were higher. However, by 4 combining the peak hours -- typically the volumes 5 were roughly ten percent higher in '06 than in '05. 6 What was consistent were the peak hours. The peak 7 hours were from 8 to 9 and 5 to 6 p.m., basically, 8 in both years. So the peak hours were consistent 9 but the volumes were not consistent. So, we stand 10 corrected in our report in that regard. 11 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Before you get 12 on to the next comment, Mr. Gordon, did that affect 13 any conclusions that you've reached in the report? 14 MR. GORDON: It did not. 15 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Okay. Thank 16 you. If you could address the next comment, please? 17 MR. GORDON: The next comment 18 was in regard to a background growth rate of two 19 percent per year which we use. And we applied to 20 the 2005 data. And then we only grew it by one 21 year, we're now in 2007, the data should have been 22 grown by two years. We went back and reanalyzed the 23 intersections by growing the volumes by two years 24 using the two percent growth to recalculate our no- 25 build level service analysis and basically there was - 34 - 1 no change in the level service by that additional 2 one year of growth. 3 MR. CHEWCASKIE: All right. The 4 next comment regarding the existing intersections 5 level of service. 6 MR. GORDON: Yes, the -- 7 Mr. Klein pointed out that the intersection under 8 existing conditions is operating on level of service 9 --- as you know, a lot of intersections within 10 Hudson County are not operating on level of service. 11 I've examined the data further and determined that 12 there were congested conditions during our traffic 13 counts at the intersections. Therefore, the level 14 of service A is really not a true reflection of the 15 operations of the intersections. So what we had 16 done, we ran some analysis to basically double the 17 existing volumes in order to determine if that, in 18 fact, would still result in acceptable levels of 19 service at these intersections. And by doing so, 20 the intersection still operates at level of service 21 D or better at those intersections. 22 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Okay. And then 23 if you could address the last comment regarding the 24 traffic operations along Bergen Turnpike? 25 MR. GORDON: Yeah. The - 35 - 1 operations on Bergen Turnpike, you know, on the -- 2 the fact that we -- we're now presenting at level of 3 service A in both the existing condition and build 4 condition, and in fact the volume is -- if the -- 5 obviously the service rate of the volume, the flow 6 rate is congested. If we were to double the number 7 and reanalyze it we're still going to get an 8 acceptable level of service. So even in the build 9 condition, we're still going to get acceptable level 10 of service of D or better at these intersections 11 with increased volume. The congestion point is 12 probably upstream with traffic backing down towards 13 our intersections. 14 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Mr. Gordon, my 15 understanding is, is that you had the opportunity to 16 review all of the data that was submitted earlier 17 and to re-review the report. And based upon your 18 analysis, do you find that the level of service for 19 the intersections would be functioning in an 20 appropriate manner? 21 MR. GORDON: Yes, I do. 22 MR. CHEWCASKIE: And in 23 addition, it is also my understanding that the 24 number of units for this building is sixty-three. 25 And that would create a trip generation of how many - 36 - 1 vehicles in a peak hour? 2 MR. GORDON: The original report 3 that was submitted was based on a higher number of 4 units. It was based on a number of eighty-one 5 units. Now it's been reduced to sixty-three units. 6 So basically during the morning peak hour we're 7 looking at a total of twenty trips during that 8 morning peak hour, which is less than one every 9 three minutes. And then in the evening peak hour 10 we're looking at thirty-two total trips, which is 11 one every two minutes. So, you're looking at a trip 12 generation of one every three -- two to three 13 minutes at this site, which is really a negligible 14 impact. The State of New Jersey Department of 15 Transportation looks at a trip generation of a 16 hundred trips or more during the peak hours as a 17 significant generator of traffic. And this site, 18 obviously, does not fit that category. 19 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Mr. Chairman, 20 that's all I have for Mr. Gordon. 21 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Do we 22 have our consultant, Mr. Klein? 23 MR. KLEIN: Again, Lee Klein 24 from T & M Associates. I don't -- I think he's 25 addressed my concerns. I don't know if Mr. Jasek - 37 - 1 has any others but it seemed that, you know, to see 2 a level of service A on a road like that was 3 suspect, so that's why I asked him to -- to relook 4 at that information. Again, I guess, what he had 5 alluded to was that maybe upstream from the 6 intersections at 37th and 38th there might be -- or 7 downstream, there might be an impeding movement or 8 an impeding intersection that's causing the cues to 9 come back towards this intersection. I don't think 10 that the amount of traffic that's being generated by 11 this site is going to really have much of an effect 12 on that. I think it's an existing condition that 13 needs to be dealt with just under existing 14 conditions. 15 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Okay. 16 Mr. Jasek? 17 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Mr. 18 Chairman, I don't have any additional comment. I'm 19 familiar with the site and on Bergen Turnpike there 20 will be only entrance. The exit will be on 38th 21 Street. Well, the 38th Street is one way going -- 22 going east, yes. Going away from J.F.K. So anybody 23 who wants to go the other way will have to come 24 through Kennedy Boulevard, go south one block, come 25 back to 37th Street and go down to Bergen Turnpike. - 38 - 1 But that's the only way how to get out from that 2 building. 3 I just want to make a note to the traffic 4 consultant that the county is designing traffic 5 light at 37th Street within about eighteen months 6 that traffic light will be functioning. So just for 7 your information. 8 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Thank you. 9 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Okay. Do 10 we have a motion to approve? 11 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman? 12 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Yes? 13 SECRETARY MARKS: There is -- 14 there are additional comments by Mr. Tridente and I 15 had one report from the site plan and sub-division 16 review committee. 17 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: All 18 right. All right. 19 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 20 in addition to Mr. Tridente's comments there was a 21 recommendation which is in the letter -- my letter 22 from the site plan and sub-division review committee 23 for a bicycle rack to be installed on-site within 24 the parking lot or an area to be designated by 25 the -- the developer or applicant. - 39 - 1 MR. CHEWCASKIE: And that's -- 2 that's acceptable. 3 SECRETARY MARKS: That's 4 accepted. Okay. I have no further comments. 5 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Go ahead. 6 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Just for 7 the record purpose I want to find out how many 8 parking spaces they have. And out of sixty-three 9 unit, how many will be one bedroom, how many will be 10 two bedroom? 11 MR. BEESLEY: Well, I don't 12 remember the split on the bedrooms but we have 13 sixty-three units and we seventy-six parking spaces. 14 And that was approved by Union City, that parking 15 ratio. 16 MR. CHEWCASKIE: And I may, I 17 believe the parking was consistent with the 18 Residential Site Improvement Standards. 19 MR. BEESLEY: That's right. 20 MR. CHEWCASKIE: There were no 21 waivers requested. 22 MR. BEESLEY: That's correct. 23 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: Mr. 24 Chairman, will there be assigned spaces? 25 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Yes. - 40 - 1 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Because I 2 think RSIS standard required for one bedroom it 3 requires 1.8 parking spaces. 4 MR. CHEWCASKIE: I think, in 5 this instance, they utilized the high-rise standard, 6 Mr. Mehta, because it was nine stories -- it was a 7 ten story building. 8 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: I 9 understand but usually those type of changes happens 10 when -- because the proposed application is close to 11 the public transportation or major transportation 12 hub. 13 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Yeah, there 14 is -- 15 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: This is a 16 completely insular area. 17 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Well, there is 18 testimony that Mr. Gordon provided at the Union City 19 hearing that there is bus transportation available 20 at Kennedy Boulevard but you would have to walk up 21 the street in order to get that bus transportation. 22 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: And because 23 this particular road is a heavily traveled road and 24 when on those days there is Lincoln Tunnel or 25 traffic backup or traffic problem there's always -- - 41 - 1 even the people take a detour and people travel this 2 road. 3 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Right. I agree 4 commissioner. What was testified to during the 5 course of the hearings was the availability of 6 public transportation and also there is -- there was 7 talk of the communities providing bus services for 8 the light rail. 9 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: So are you 10 proposing your own, like, a bus service or anything? 11 MR. CHEWCASKIE: At this time we 12 did not propose it. The city was satisfied that the 13 parking was sufficient based upon the design and 14 that it would be assigned parking. 15 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Is that 16 it? All right. On the motion -- do we have a -- 17 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: I'll 18 make a motion to approve this application. 19 COMMISSIONER NG: Second. 20 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: All in 21 favor -- 22 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 23 on a motion to approve application SP-01-07 made by 24 Commissioner Bettinger, seconded by Commissioner Ng. 25 Commissioner Avagliano? - 42 - 1 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 2 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 3 Bettinger? 4 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: Aye. 5 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 6 DiDomenico? 7 COMMISSIONER DIDOMINICO: Aye. 8 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 9 Jasek? 10 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Aye. 11 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 12 Mehta? 13 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Abstain. 14 SECRETARY MARKS: Abstain? 15 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: I don't 16 want to vote. 17 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 18 Ng? 19 COMMISSIONER NG: Yes. 20 SECRETARY MARKS: Chairman 21 Fitzgibbons? 22 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 23 MR. CHEWCASKIE: Thank you for 24 your consideration. 25 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: You're - 43 - 1 welcome. 2 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 3 the next application scheduled for public hearing is 4 SP-03-07, Dublin Properties, LLC located at 9255- 5 9271 Kennedy Boulevard which is block 416-A, lots 19 6 through 23 in the Township of North Bergen. 7 MR. ROSSADI: Good evening, 8 Robert Rossadi appearing for Alonzo Neverett 9 (phonetic) for Dublin Properties. Members, an 10 application was originally made to the North Bergen 11 Planning Board for a thirty unit multi-family 12 building. That proposal was approved and resolution 13 was passed on January 2nd of 2007. That should be 14 attached to the application here tonight. 15 In connection with the application 16 tonight, we did receive two letters with comments. 17 One dated March 5th and one dated April 5th of 2007. 18 I have both letters. I've reviewed, along with the 19 comments, by an architect and an engineer. They are 20 here and they are out in the hallway, can I run out 21 and get them, please? 22 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Yes, you 23 could. I'm not going to run out. 24 MR. ROSSADI: I'd like to call 25 Mr. Arencibia of CPA Architects. - 44 - 1 MR. ARANCIBIA: Hello. 2 MR. ROSSADI: Mr. Arencibia are 3 you a licensed in New Jersey architect? 4 MR. ARANCIBIA: Yes, I am. I've 5 appeared before this board before on two occasions 6 as well, too. 7 MR. ROSSADI: Why don't you tell 8 the board your qualifications? 9 MR. ARANCIBIA: I'm a registered 10 architect in New York and New Jersey. I've been 11 practicing for about eighteen years and I've 12 appeared at many boards throughout the State of New 13 Jersey and New York, and this being one of them. 14 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Swear him 15 in. 16 MR. ROSSADI: Are you the 17 architect that presented the original application to 18 the North Bergen Planning Board? 19 MR. ARANCIBIA: Yes, I am. 20 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Excuse 21 me. Can he be sworn in? 22 (Albert Arencibia is duly sworn) 23 MR. CALVANICO: The witness has 24 been sworn, Mr. Chairman. 25 MR. ROSSADI: Mr. Arencibia, did - 45 - 1 you have time -- do you want me to start from the 2 beginning, with his qualifications. 3 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: No. 4 MR. ROSSADI: Did you have 5 opportunity to review two letters with comments one 6 of March 5th and one of April 5th of this year? 7 MR. ARANCIBIA: Yes, we did. 8 MR. ROSSADI: Okay. As a result 9 of the comments in those two letters, were any 10 modifications made? 11 MR. ARANCIBIA: Yes, we did. We 12 actually showed there was -- there was a couple of 13 issues -- we had gotten some requirements from 14 Boswell with respect to, sort of, the sanitary and 15 the storm water for the site itself. What we've 16 designed is a detention basin on-site itself where 17 we'll be able to actually have it going out to the 18 street. In order to comply with the Boswell 19 requirement they wanted us to connect it out across 20 the street to the combined storm on the other side 21 of the street. They also, additionally, had 22 requested that we reroute and kill a line that was 23 at the corner of Kennedy Boulevard and 92nd Street 24 so that we'd be able to then reroute a condition 25 that they had where one of their storm system went - 46 - 1 in one direction and came back almost at 270 2 degrees. So they had bad flow problems. So what 3 we've done is, we basically looked at Boswell's 4 letters and we've -- we're going to comply with 5 their requirements as far as putting a new sanitary 6 manhole on the other end, kill that other line on 7 the other side and connect to the other side of the 8 street -- on the south side of 92nd Street. 9 We have also added the types of pipes, the 10 information they wanted as far as the pipes and so 11 forth and so on, general housekeeping items as well 12 as showing the requirements that we're going to be 13 providing a sign at the end of the handicapped 14 stalls. We added the details of the standard county 15 details for the curbs and the drop curbs, and so 16 forth and so on, and sidewalk details. All of that 17 has been added on to the drawing as well. 18 And we also have added a sheet onto our 19 drawings which has the illumination of lighting 20 level for the -- the lighting I'm proposing on the 21 outside of the building as well. 22 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: 23 Commissioner Jasek, do you have any comments? 24 COMMISSIONER JASEK: You're not 25 going to demolish the White Castle, right? - 47 - 1 MR. ARENCIBIA: No. 2 COMMISSIONER JASEK: You are 3 right next to it. 4 MR. ARENCIBIA: On Dimitry, no. 5 MR. JASEK: Okay. Could you 6 tell us, the access to the building, where is the 7 driveway located? 8 MR. ARENCIBIA: There's two 9 driveways. We have one that's basically right off 10 of Kennedy Boulevard. We show one entrance on the 11 left side of the building and one to the right side 12 of the building. There were some comments with 13 respect to -- we're proposing on both being 14 ingress and egress, there's was some comment as far 15 as the width of the openings, that it would be short 16 in order to comply with two-way traffic. Generally 17 speaking a building of this size and number of units 18 you're not going to have a lot of traffic moving in 19 and out at the same time. So we'd like to keep it 20 as two way ingress and egress just for the ease of 21 traffic moving back and forth in the actual site 22 itself. 23 However, if the board would deem it 24 necessary to make it a one-way traffic pattern, we 25 would be able to do that as well. In my experience, - 48 - 1 on a lot of these buildings, even more units, you 2 could actually have that width and still be able to 3 accommodate the traffic without incurring any impact 4 on the traffic out on the street. 5 But again, all -- the ingress and egress 6 would be on one side of the building and the other 7 side of the building, on the front of Kennedy 8 Boulevard. And we have a central circulation that 9 runs so you have nice and easy flow from one side to 10 the other. 11 COMMISSIONER JASEK: So you will 12 have two driveways, both of them will be in and out. 13 MR. ARANCIBIA: that's what 14 we're proposing, yes. 15 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Will it be 16 gated? 17 MR. ARENCIBIA: Yes, there'll be 18 a roll-up gate that's going to go up and then will 19 be dropping down. The entire garage will be 20 mechanically ventilated as well with carbon monoxide 21 detectors and so forth. 22 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Well, my 23 concern is that if the two cars are trying to get in 24 one will be across the sidewalk, the other one will 25 be on the boulevard. And if there is a third car, - 49 - 1 then we have a problem. How you going to deal with 2 situation like that? 3 MR. ARENCIBIA: Well, I mean, 4 that might occur on one occasion, but very few times 5 that's usually when it's going to happen on -- 6 especially on a building where you have only thirty 7 units. It's not really a very high intensity 8 building. 9 COMMISSIONER JASEK: I know, but 10 you have fifty parking spots. 11 MR. ARENCIBIA: That's correct, 12 yes. 13 COMMISSIONER JASEK: I think 14 that's a little bit of concern. 15 MR. ARENCIBIA: Again, we -- 16 we'll be willing to do it one-way traffic, I just 17 think to free the circulation, probably to keep it 18 better is two. I think either way. 19 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Well, one- 20 way traffic will not alleviate this problem. 21 MR. ARENCIBIA: All right. 22 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Because I'm 23 not concerned about a car exiting. The cars waiting 24 for the roll-up door to open -- I don't know, Mr. 25 Chairman, we had in the past some similar situation, - 50 - 1 I believe, in Hoboken. And we did resolve it with 2 some if I remember, to bend the parking and have at 3 least one or two spots for the cars waiting to 4 open -- to open the gate. 5 MR. ARENCIBIA: I hear what 6 you're saying and it might happen on a few occasions 7 but the majority of the time, I would say ninety- 8 nine percent of the time that's not going to be the 9 case. 10 COMMISSIONER JASEK: All right. 11 At this point we just might try it and see what will 12 happen. 13 MR. ARENCIBIA: All right. 14 That's fine. 15 COMMISSIONER JASEK: It's very 16 hard to predict it. 17 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Can you 18 give us some advice? 19 MR. REIMON: Edwin Reimon again 20 from Medina Consultants. We provided some comments 21 to the applicants and (indiscernible) who is account 22 engineer, I think that we should try to maintain one 23 way in and one way out. I think they have enough 24 room for circulation inside the building. It's 25 going to be safer to have a one way in and one way - 51 - 1 out. 2 There are other comments that we 3 submitted to the applicant and the comments were 4 related also to traffic. They have two existing 5 driveways there but the proposed driveways are not 6 at the same location as the existing driveways. So 7 we are concerned about this -- the parking spaces 8 that are going to be deleted. We don't know if they 9 are proposing to put back those parking spaces since 10 they are going to move the location of the 11 driveways. So we are looking for answers from the 12 engineer regarding the parking spaces along Kennedy 13 Boulevard. 14 And then we have two comments 15 regarding the drainage. One of the comments is 16 already addressed because the municipal engineer 17 already requested storm water management measures 18 for the site. And the second comment is that we 19 believe that the storm should be connected to the 20 line that is underneath the sidewalk. Unless the 21 applicant can prove that there is a different line, 22 a different sewer or storm line that is not owned by 23 the county, we want to see an explanation of where 24 this storm drain is going to be connected to. 25 MR. ARENCIBIA: Okay. Let me - 52 - 1 answer the first one first. Basically, presently on 2 the site in front of this tract of land there is 3 parking spaces for four cars. Based on the new 4 configuration we can have actually one car at each 5 of the buildings, in between the buildings where we 6 have our entrance lobby, we can accommodate three 7 additional parking spaces so we'll be able to pick 8 up one parking space, you know, on the sidewalk. 9 Now, the other issue was -- 10 MR. JENNE: I can address that. 11 MR. ARENCIBIA: Maybe Mr. Jenne 12 might be able to address those issues. He prepared 13 the drawings and so forth. 14 MR. ROSSADI: I'm going to call 15 Mr. Carl Jenne of Jenne Associates. 16 MR. CALVANICO: Mr. Jenne, 17 please spell your last name for the record. 18 MR. JENNE: Carl Jenne, J-E-N-N- 19 E. 20 MR. CALVANICO: Thank you. 21 (Carl Jenne is duly sworn) 22 MR. ROSSADI: Mr. Jenne, are you 23 a professional engineer in the State of New Jersey? 24 MR. JENNE: Yes, since 1990. 25 I've been practicing since 1975. I am currently - 53 - 1 the -- the borough engineer in Richfield, the 2 planning/zoning board engineer in Guttenberg. I was 3 with Medina Consultants at the start of their 4 contract with you so I've been here also, in the 5 back not presenting testimony as Mr. Reimon did. 6 And I have -- while I haven't done the design that's 7 being presented, I've reviewed it. And what I'm 8 doing is coordinating the work with the town, with 9 Boswell. 10 MR. ROSSADI: And did you have 11 an opportunity to review the comments? 12 MR. JENNE: Yes, I did. 13 Specifically regarding the storm water. The reason, 14 initially, there was no storm water detention system 15 is that there is contamination on the adjacent 16 property. When this application first came in last 17 year, it was for a larger tract of land. The part 18 of the property to the west has been cut out and is 19 not included in this revised project because that 20 land had some contamination under it. Our concern, 21 at that point in time, was that we didn't want to 22 put dry wells into the system, recharge water into 23 the ground and spread the contamination. We're not 24 sure whether that's an issue at this point in time 25 so what we have done is we've prepared a design for - 54 - 1 storm water management for dry well systems under 2 the knowledge that when we do test pits and we get 3 further information about the environmental, if we 4 are not appropriately allowed to do that. And 5 again, we don't want to exacerbate an underground 6 contamination problem. 7 We still have a system with an 8 adequate pipe size that would take the storm water 9 and connect it to the existing storm/sewer system on 10 the project. So that is a further explanation of 11 the first of Mr. Reimon's questions with storm 12 water. We have a detention system designed but it 13 may or may not be something that actually gets 14 built, depending upon the contamination. 15 The design itself, Mr. Reimon 16 was under the same assumption that I was about what 17 the line underneath the sidewalk on the north side 18 of the roadway is. And it wasn't until Boswell's 19 engineer provided us further detail that we found 20 out that that's not a combined sewer system. It's 21 not a storm sewer but the line that's underneath the 22 sidewalk on the north side is a sanitary sewer. So 23 what we have done on the revised plan, that you 24 haven't seen yet but we're presenting, is we have a 25 detention system inside and we have an overflow pipe - 55 - 1 that comes across the street to connect into the 2 manhole, the storm manhole that exists in First 3 Street. 4 MR. CALVANICO: Excuse me, Mr. 5 Jenne, could you just identify the documents that 6 you're referring to, for the record. 7 MR. JENNE: P-100-A. 8 MR. CALVANICO: And the date? 9 MR. JENNE: 4/12/2007. So what 10 we have is the storm -- instead of connecting into 11 this line here under the sidewalk, which we now have 12 found out is a sanitary not a storm, it's going to 13 connect across the street to that existing manhole 14 that's on the storm line that runs on the south side 15 of Kennedy Boulevard. The size of this line will be 16 big enough not only to work as an overflow for a 17 detention system, because even if you do have an 18 underground system, chance may happen where the 19 storm that it needs to pick up is going to be 20 greater than the design. You have to safely get rid 21 of the water. So if that system goes in, this will 22 be an overflow line. If the system does not go in 23 then that will be the line that will carry the storm 24 water collected from the roof out into the 25 storm/sewer system. - 56 - 1 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Okay. 2 You'll have to open up the road for that, correct? 3 MR. JENNE: Correct. 4 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: You'll 5 have to get a permit? 6 MR. JENNE: Correct. Now 7 related to that with the sanitary line, and that's 8 what -- my involvement is, I reviewed these plans I 9 did not prepare these but I'm coordinating the work 10 with Boswell for the storm and the sanitary. This 11 sanitary line under the sidewalk, from what we were 12 told by Boswell, they have serious difficulties with 13 for two causes. One is that it has very little flow 14 in it so that it doesn't flow well. Therefore they 15 wanted us to connect our sanitary flow into that 16 line to provide some more volume to it to help flush 17 it out so it operates better. 18 The next challenge that they 19 have is this flows underneath the sidewalk to a 20 manhole right here in the sidewalk in front of the 21 White Castle. Right now the flow out of that 22 manhole goes down perpendicular and then somehow 23 takes a bend and another bend and connects to the 24 sanitary manhole right there. At which point the 25 water has to change direction and flow back this - 57 - 1 way. Needless to say, it isn't doing that too well 2 and there's a lot of backups and it doesn't flow 3 properly. So what Boswell has asked the applicant 4 to do, which we are doing which doesn't show on this 5 plan yet, we're going to abandon this -- this crazy 6 pipe that crosses the street here. We're going to 7 install a new pipe that goes ninety degrees across 8 into a brand new manhole on this sanitary line which 9 then flows back here. So we're doing two things 10 with the sanitary. We're adding more flow to a line 11 that doesn't have a lot of flow in it now so it 12 operates better and we're putting a new line in with 13 proper turns so that there isn't blockages. Because 14 they have serious problems with this entire line 15 that comes up this way and over because of this 16 craziness in the intersection. 17 So this sanitary line will be 18 abandoned. We'll plug the ends. We'll reconstruct 19 the benches, the lower area of the manhole where the 20 pipe comes in and out; we'll reconstruct that so the 21 flow coming in flows nice to the way it goes out 22 ignoring the fact that there was a different pipe 23 system there. 24 So those are two improvements that 25 will be made as part of this. Those -- that - 58 - 1 improvement is not yet shown on this plan. And that 2 wasn't one of Mr. Reimon's questions but it relates 3 to the whole issue with the sanitary line underneath 4 the sidewalk and make thing operate better. The 5 result of this will be that there will be two 6 crossings of Kennedy Boulevard in order to construct 7 this. The sanitary flow itself, from the building 8 as I said, won't be crossing the street but it will 9 be picked up by the line in the sidewalk on the 10 north side. 11 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Mr. 12 Chairman, it sounds good to me. It will be 13 definitely improvement in that area for the 14 sanitary, yes. 15 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: You would 16 have to -- when you resolve all this problem you'll 17 have to submit a new set of -- set of drawings? 18 MR. JENNE: We will reflect this 19 on the revised drawings to you, yes. We're 20 currently working that out with Boswell who brought 21 up the comments as they were looking at the 22 permitting process in North Bergen. 23 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Steve, do 24 you have anything to comment on that? 25 SECRETARY MARKS: Besides those, - 59 - 1 Mr. Chairman, it was just the recommendation of the 2 site plan and subdivision committee to include a 3 bicycle rack at the applicant's choosing. The 4 details and specifications to be chosen by the 5 applicant in the parking garage area. 6 MR. ARENCIBIA: I have all that. 7 That's very difficult. Our parking is such that 8 there's really very little space. A bicycle rack -- 9 when you put a bicycle into it you basically -- for 10 each bike you're looking at a two-foot by six-foot 11 space. And unfortunately we don't have a space 12 where we can actually accommodate a two-foot by six- 13 foot space for a number of bicycles. 14 There is an area in our garage 15 which is roughly four foot wide, which is like an 16 extra space, it's wide enough so you could 17 accommodate bicycles on there but a regular bicycle 18 stand is such that your bicycles go into the 19 direction. So I couldn't figure a space to put it 20 in the garage. If the board would like we have -- 21 we recessed according to the building. We can draw 22 some papers and have, like, a bicycle rack on the 23 rear of the property, although I don't know how 24 beneficial that would be. 25 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, - 60 - 1 there are all sorts of -- it doesn't have to be a 2 typical or standard bicycle rack. There are all 3 sorts of bicycle racks out there. It doesn't have 4 to be the length or width that the applicant 5 mentioned. So I would just ask that the applicant 6 just look into it and provide back the details. 7 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: All 8 right. 9 MR. ARENCIBIA: We can provide 10 some bicycle areas. 11 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Yeah, 12 okay. That's not a problem. 13 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Mr. 14 Chairman? 15 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Yes, Mr. 16 Mehta? 17 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: 18 Regarding -- you were mentioning that adjunct 19 property which you -- you're going to cut it off and 20 you didn't include in the proposed application was 21 contaminated. Did you do the testing for this 22 property and does -- 23 MR. ARENCIBIA: (Indiscernible). 24 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: And so this 25 property doesn't have any contamination? - 61 - 1 MR. ARENCIBIA: That's correct, 2 otherwise we wouldn't have been able to go this far. 3 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: This was 4 approved, right, by the township? 5 MR. ARENCIBIA: Yes, it was. 6 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Mr. 7 Chairman, let's go back to the flow of the traffic. 8 I agree with our consultant that we should have one 9 driveway in and one driveway out. If there is a 10 problem then we can solve it then at one driveway 11 much better than at both. So I would ask to make it 12 condition. 13 MR. ARENCIBIA: Again, I don't 14 see a problem with it. I mean, I think it works 15 either way but -- 16 MR. REIMON: And I would like to 17 see revised plans. 18 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Okay. 19 Make sure you give everybody the revised plans. 20 MR. ARENCIBIA: We'll have them 21 done by Friday. Almost everything is on there 22 except for the connection to the sewer on the other 23 side, the new manhole on the other side, that's it. 24 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Do we 25 have a motion? - 62 - 1 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: I will make 2 a motion to approve with the condition -- 3 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: And the 4 advanced plans -- 5 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: And like 6 Jasek said, that instead of the two ways in, make a 7 one way in and one way out. That's the main 8 condition. 9 COMMISSIONER JASEK: I second 10 the motion. 11 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 12 on a motion to conditionally approve application SP- 13 03-07 made by Commissioner Mehta, seconded by 14 Commissioner Jasek. Commissioner Avagliano? 15 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 16 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 17 Bettinger? 18 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: Aye. 19 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 20 DiDomenico? 21 COMMISSIONER DIDOMENICO: Aye. 22 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 23 Jasek? 24 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Aye. 25 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner - 63 - 1 Mehta? 2 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 3 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 4 Ng? 5 COMMISSIONER NG: Aye. 6 SECRETARY MARKS: Chairman 7 Fitzgibbons? 8 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 9 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 10 the motion passed. 11 MR. ARENCIBIA: Thank you very 12 much, I appreciate it. 13 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Do we 14 have old business? 15 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 16 under old business I was hoping to memorialize the 17 contracts and the resolution from last meeting as 18 set forth in the minutes from the last meeting. The 19 planning board went out to RFQ for professional 20 legal services and professional engineering services 21 and the planning board passed a resolution of 22 support for assembly bill 1308, an act concerning 23 county planning boards. 24 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: We could 25 approve it all under one? - 64 - 1 SECRETARY MARKS: Could it 2 approved as -- all four were approved at last 3 meeting -- Mr. Chairman, it's been suggested or 4 recommended to approve all -- since like 5 applications approved at last meeting, it's 6 recommended to approve all four items at the same 7 time. 8 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: I make a 9 motion -- no, I don't make a motion. Do we have a 10 motion? 11 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: I'll 12 make a motion. You have a motion, I'll make the 13 motion. 14 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Second. 15 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 16 on a motion to memorialize the resolutions as set 17 forth made by Commissioner Bettinger, seconded by 18 Commissioner Avagliano. Commissioner Avagliano? 19 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 20 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 21 Bettinger? 22 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: Aye. 23 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 24 DiDomenico? 25 COMMISSIONER DIDOMENICO: Aye. - 65 - 1 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 2 Jasek? 3 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Aye. 4 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 5 Mehta? 6 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Abstain. 7 SECRETARY MARKS: Abstain. 8 Commissioner Ng? 9 COMMISSIONER NG: Aye. 10 SECRETARY MARKS: Chairman 11 Fitzgibbons? 12 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 13 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 14 the motion passed. 15 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Do we 16 have new business? 17 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 18 under new business this evening we have Ms. Blanche 19 Braillard from T & M and Associates. Ms. Braillard 20 has prepared the draft of the Hudson County Parks 21 Master Plan and she is here to present the draft 22 master plan to the board -- draft Parks Master plan 23 to the board. 24 MS. BRAILLARD: Well, it's a 25 pleasure to let you know what we have prepared as a - 66 - 1 draft for this master plan -- Park Master Plan 2 update. We've been working on this to help 3 visualize how each of the nine county parks can 4 evolve to better serve the park users over the next 5 six years and to create the plan to do so. County 6 staff and key members of the administration have 7 been working diligently with T & M on the 8 preparation of this plan. It projects into the 9 future six years and suggests, year by year, from 10 July 2007 to July 2013 what projects are most needed 11 in the county parks. And that is all summarized in 12 the draft report that you have in front of you. 13 What was the process? The 14 process began with an inventory of the existing park 15 facilities which were visually surveyed on all of 16 the park sites during December 2006. Each of the 17 park playgrounds were very carefully looked at by 18 our inspectors. The athletic facilities, the 19 drainage, all of these aspects were photographed, 20 catalogued, measured, in many cases we went to all 21 of the county buildings on the park sites. We 22 looked extensively at the maintenance facilities, 23 for example. And the findings of those on-site 24 surveys were recorded on detailed facilities 25 assessment forms which comprise from four to eight - 67 - 1 pages for each park. And those were completed and 2 they are on file with the county engineer and with 3 the parks office. So that was the base of 4 information that we started with. 5 The next step was public input. 6 The public was invited to participate in a series of 7 four meetings to receive public input on what was 8 desired, as far as physical improvements, to the 9 county parks. And the public input sessions were 10 held in the north, south, central and western parts 11 of the county. So based on this input by the 12 public, the park users and county staff, specific 13 improvement recommendations were prepared and are 14 shown on an improvement plan for each park with 15 estimated costs for the improvements. For example, 16 here you see the improvement plan for Lincoln Park 17 East and its prioritization chart. The same here 18 for the prioritization of the proposed improvements. 19 So the park by park 20 prioritization is based on the following criteria; 21 that the improvements would be implemented over the 22 next six years with improvements in all sections of 23 the county occurring during any one year. The plan 24 also proposes renovations to existing recreation 25 facilities and the construction of new recreation - 68 - 1 facilities. With new facilities being added to the 2 park system as a goal. For example, here in Lincoln 3 Park East, the construction of a synthetic turf 4 athletic facility in the area of ball fields 10 and 5 11 is proposed. 6 Key goals of the county, such as 7 planting trees, adding more trees throughout the 8 county in the county parks and along county 9 roadways, certainly there have been many trees 10 incorporated into the plans for each of the parks. 11 Also, open space -- the addition of open space to 12 the park system has been taken into account and 13 there are -- there is a list of possible future 14 acquisitions in the plan as well. 15 For reasons of efficiency and 16 cost savings, construction of similar improvements 17 in several parks are slated during a particular 18 year. For example, in the first year there's an 19 emphasis on improvements to the playgrounds. That's 20 a key concern. So in several of the parks 21 reconstruction of the playgrounds occurs during the 22 first year. 23 This summary for all the parks 24 over the six years of the master plan duration and 25 specifically what renovations should occur and - 69 - 1 Steven Greg Bayonne Park in year one, year two and 2 what those -- what the totals of those costs are. 3 Nonetheless it's intended that the prioritization 4 system is a flexible system. So this is a 5 guideline. The county may find that there could be 6 a shift in priorities, but again this is a guideline 7 for the county to follow. So less improvements -- 8 the improvements that are less urgent could be 9 deferred to a later date. 10 Funding, because of the county's 11 great need for open space, because of the density of 12 the population here, the county has been, in the 13 past, very successful in using funds to improve the 14 parks from the Green Acres Program. The county has 15 also planned to fund these improvements through 16 county capital funds and can also apply for funding 17 from other sources such as the county's own Open 18 Space Trust Fund. 19 I do have boards here that would 20 show the improvements in all of the parks. If there 21 are any questions on a specific park or any other 22 aspect of the plan, I'd be happy to answer them. 23 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Do we 24 have to pass a resolution tonight? I think we 25 should review this before we pass any resolution. - 70 - 1 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Mr. 2 Chairman, as Freeholder DiDomenico knows, this draft 3 of the plan was presented to the county executive 4 who endorsed it and to the Freeholder's committee on 5 parks, roads and bridges and they endorse it. It is 6 a rather tight time schedule. Ms. Blanche will 7 present this next Tuesday to the Freeholders, to the 8 whole board and the Freeholders will have the 9 opportunity to approve it next Thursday. So before 10 that is done it should be approved, officially, by 11 the planning board because it is a plan. 12 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Well, 13 this should have been presented to us before this 14 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Yeah, I 15 agree. 16 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: I mean, 17 you know. You know, I look at Hoboken with the 18 little park of Hudson County has Hoboken, and you 19 have here where you hold your ceremonies for -- 20 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Yes, 21 always there in Hoboken. 22 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: You have 23 the (indiscernible). But when you have this 24 formally sunken garden refurbishment, please be 25 advised, that's a historical site there. That was - 71 - 1 never a garden. Do you know what that was? That 2 was a pond where water used to flow years ago and 3 there were fish in the pond during the summer. So 4 I'd like to see the county restore that back to its 5 normal use during the summer. 6 I mean, the suggestions that 7 this board could give on their own community. 8 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: 9 Hoboken, to the beach. 10 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: There are 11 suggestions that maybe these -- we would like to go 12 back and -- 13 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Put 14 that beach back in again. 15 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: No, it's 16 not a beach -- 17 MS. BRAILLARD: Well, we'd 18 certainly be interested in hearing anything that you 19 have to offer. 20 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: I know 21 for a fact because when I was a kid my mother used 22 to take me there and there used to be fish in that 23 little pond over there. Did you ever see that piece 24 of property there that used to be a pond, where the 25 statute is of Columbus? - 72 - 1 MR. CALVANICO: Mr. Chairman, if 2 I might? This is a draft plan, at this point. I 3 think that the board could go ahead with an approval 4 of it because you're just approving what's in the 5 draft. 6 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: You can 7 always amend the draft. 8 MR. CALVANICO: There's still 9 time, at this point, to make comments for the draft 10 and things just as you suggested with regard to the 11 pond can certainly be formally delivered. We can 12 review it and deliver a package of recommendations 13 from the planning board to the consultants before 14 they make the plan final. 15 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: Mr. 16 Calvanico, will we have to vote on this again if 17 we're just voting on a draft at the moment? 18 MR. CALVANICO: I don't know 19 what the procedure is; does this have to come back 20 to us once it's finalized? 21 COMMISSIONER JASEK: Well, it 22 will be presented to the Freeholders and they might 23 have a comment. I'm sure that they will have a 24 comment because they will be given the plan on next 25 Tuesday. It will be presented to them just like you - 73 - 1 are getting the presentation and the booklet at the 2 same time. So, you know, I don't see any -- any 3 harm if you want to study it and make a comment and 4 then we can vote on it next month. 5 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: We can 6 draft our own resolution to their resolution that if 7 we have comments on this -- 8 COMMISSIONER JASEK: That's 9 correct. 10 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: We have 11 some parks there that you have a comment on or 12 Jersey City or North Bergen, in our communities that 13 we have county parks. 14 COMMISSIONER JASEK: All right. 15 Mr. Chairman, the county is not looking for rubber 16 stamping this plan but really for the comment 17 because this is a planning board, that's a plan and 18 the planning board has jurisdiction over that. So 19 any comment would be very, very valuable. 20 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 21 I have to give Blanche Braillard a lot of credit. 22 She's been working with the county administration 23 for some time now and she's been extremely diligent 24 in receiving and taking back the comments from 25 Freeholders, from administrative officials, from - 74 - 1 municipal officials, from the general public. I 2 believe Ms. Braillard conducted four public 3 hearings. 4 MR. BRIALLARD: That's correct. 5 SECRETARY MARKS: One in 6 Bayonne, one in Jersey City, one in North Bergen and 7 one in Carney. And I give Ms. Braillard a lot of 8 credit for basically digesting a lot of information, 9 some things that were implementable and were great 10 ideas, some ideas that may not have been so 11 implementable and may not have been the best ideas 12 from the general public and so on and so forth. And 13 I am sure that she would take all the comments and 14 recommendations of this board and incorporate them 15 into the final Parks Master Plan. 16 MS. BRAILLARD: Absolutely. 17 MS. DIDOMENICO: Mr. Chair, if I 18 could ask to Director Marks' comments. I did attend 19 the meeting -- the public hearing at Steven Greg 20 Park and I've spoken with my colleagues on the board 21 that have attended theirs. And they really listened 22 to all the public feedback and looking at the 23 results, incorporated as much of it as possible. 24 And also in conjunction with our director of parks, 25 our public resources committee, they've gone back - 75 - 1 and forth. This is a long work in progress and 2 really taken a lot of feedback in establishing this. 3 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: I agree 4 that this is a beautiful project. But we should 5 have some input. As the planning board for the 6 county we should have had some input. 7 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: 8 Absolutely. 9 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: So, I 10 have no problem and, you know, let's put it to a 11 vote on the resolution. Do we have a motion? 12 COMMISSIONER DIDOMENICO: 13 Motion. 14 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Do we 15 have a second? 16 COMMISSIONER JASEK: I second 17 the motion to introduce the draft of the Master Plan 18 for the parks, not to vote on that. Because if you 19 want to have a vote on that then you need a final. 20 Fin