- 1 - 1 BOROUGH OF JERSEY CITY PLANNING BOARD JERSEY CITY, NEW JERSEY 2 In Re: ) TRANSCRIPT OF 3 ) PUBLIC HEARING ) PROCEEDINGS 4 ___________________) 5 Hudson County Planning Board 567 Pavonia Avenue 6 Freeholders Chambers, 3rd Floor Jersey City, New Jersey 07306 7 Wednesday, June 27, 2007 6:29 pm 8 B E F O R E: 9 10 STEPHEN MARKS, Division Chief, Secretary 11 THOMAS A. CALVANICO, ESQ. 12 MICHAEL A. HOLLOWAY 13 RUSHABH METHA 14 RENEE BETTINGER 15 MARY AVAGLIANO 16 DANIEL CHOFFO, Chairman 17 JUDE FITZGIBBONS 18 JEFFREY DUBLIN 19 KENNEDY NG 20 DEMETRIO ARENCIBIA 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 CHOFFO: Good evening 2 everyone. I'd like to call the meeting of the 3 Hudson County Planning Board to order for this 4 evening, June 20th. Mr. Marks, has this meeting 5 been properly advertised? 6 SECRETARY MARKS: Yes, Mr. 7 Chairman. The meeting has been properly advertised 8 in accordance with the New Jersey Open Public 9 Meetings. 10 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Mr. Secretary, 11 a roll call. 12 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 13 Arencibia? 14 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Here. 15 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 16 Avagliano? Commissioner Bettinger? 17 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: Here. 18 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 19 DeDomenico is not present. Commissioner Dublin is 20 not present. Commissioner Fitzgibbons? 21 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: Here. 22 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 23 Holloway? 24 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Here. 25 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner - 3 - 1 Mehta is not present for the moment. Commissioner 2 NG? 3 COMMISSIONER NG: Here. 4 SECRETARY MARKS: Chairman 5 Choffo? 6 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Here. 7 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 8 we have a quorum. 9 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Perfect. Can 10 we please stand and salute the flag. 11 (Pledge of Allegiance is 12 recited) 13 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Go ahead. 14 SECRETARY MARKS Mr. Chairman, 15 the first appointment of business is review and 16 adoption of meeting minutes from both April 18th, 17 2007, which was the regular Planning Board meeting 18 and April 25th, 2007, which was the special public 19 hearing -- public meeting on the Hudson County Parks 20 Master Plan for 2007. 21 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: I 22 make a motion to approve the minutes as read. 23 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: Second. 24 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 25 on a motion to approve the minutes made by - 4 - 1 Commissioner Fitzgibbons, second by Commissioner 2 Bettinger. Commissioner Arencibia? 3 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Aye. 4 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 5 Avagliano? 6 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 7 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 8 Bettinger? 9 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: Aye. 10 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 11 Fitzgibbons? 12 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 13 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 14 Holloway? 15 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Aye. 16 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 17 NG? 18 COMMISSIONER NG: Aye. 19 SECRETARY MARKS: Chairman 20 Choffo? 21 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Aye. 22 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 23 motion passed. 24 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: I'd just like 25 to make an announcement tonight since we have a - 5 - 1 large crowd. Anyone that's going to address the 2 board, if they could try to speak clearly into the 3 microphone and spell their name so our court 4 stenographer doesn't have any problems with any 5 names. 6 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 7 before we get to the applications scheduled for 8 public hearing this evening we have Chris Henry from 9 Urbitran and Associates. Hudson County was the 10 beneficiary of a grant from the North Jersey 11 Transportation Planning Authority to do a bus 12 circulation, actually it was a bus infrastructure -- 13 bus and jitney infrastructure study. I'll let 14 Mr. Henry explain. He has a brief presentation 15 which he'd like to give over. 16 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: All right. 17 MR. HENRY: Good afternoon. My 18 name is Chris Henry, representing Urbitran 19 Associates. And as Mr. Marks said, we were retained 20 by the county to conduct a bus circulation and 21 infrastructure study which is in its closing stages 22 now. So I'd just like to give a brief overview of 23 the study process and some of the results. 24 The primary project goals including 25 looking at improvements to existing physical - 6 - 1 infrastructure to improve the efficiency, safety and 2 traffic flow for public transit and by extension for 3 all traffic in Hudson County. We wanted to better 4 understand the jitney operations, that's a small van 5 and it's from the private transit companies in the 6 county to address some safety and operational 7 concerns. Also looked for opportunities to link the 8 new Hudson County Plaza complex to the existing 9 transit network to maximize accessibility for both 10 employees and clients. And finally, throughout the 11 entire project we engaged the public through 12 meetings of the stakeholders, public open houses and 13 what we call drop-in sessions, speaking to transit 14 riders at some of the major transit hubs throughout 15 the county. 16 As far as infrastructure improvements are 17 concerned, we went through a lengthy data collection 18 process and an inventory of existing transit 19 services to see where ridership is highest and what 20 the busiest transit corridors are in the county. 21 This gave us a list of preliminary corridors and 22 hubs from which we worked to prioritize these 23 locations to give the study more of a focus for 24 detailed data collection and some primary data 25 collection that would help us develop - 7 - 1 recommendations and ultimately these recommendations 2 will be ranked according to which are seen as most 3 easily implemented as well as which would have the 4 likely -- the largest benefit for transit users and 5 the county as a whole. 6 Some very quick examples range from very 7 low cost, easy to implement solutions such as better 8 markings at bus stops. This picture shows a bus 9 stop on Boulevard East that is adequate in size 10 however the lack of markings often leads passengers 11 to wait closer to the curb. The buses stop where 12 the passengers wait and that can lead to buses being 13 stuck in the intersection and unnecessary traffic 14 congestion and delays. Some simple paving and 15 markings would help alleviate these situations. 16 Mid-range solutions, we looked on a 17 corridor level at several locations such as Bergen 18 Line Avenue in Union City, West New York and North 19 Bergen. This diagram shows an example of striping 20 and painting that could be done throughout the 21 corridor. No physical changes necessary but a 22 better chanelization of traffic flow, instead of one 23 wide lane helping to narrow the traffic lane 24 throughout most of the corridor, provide left-turn 25 lanes as well as move bus stops, typically, to the - 8 - 1 far side of an intersection to help alleviate 2 transit flow and all traffic in the corridor. 3 And finally, we looked at a few more 4 involved solutions, some physical infrastructure 5 changes, this being a diagram of Bergamot Avenue 6 (phonetic) and 32nd Street in Union City, which is a 7 bit of a complex and tricky intersection, frequently 8 congested and with a lot of transit traffic. And we 9 looked at some options to provide either a bus lane 10 or even make it two travel lanes but that might 11 require some small infrastructure improvements. So 12 we categorized those accordingly. 13 The next step in the study, we looked at 14 the jitney operations. It was important to identify 15 what the key issues are, and there are many 16 concerning safety, and that's both passenger safety 17 as well as vehicular safety, accidents and so forth. 18 Congestion throughout the county from both a transit 19 and traffic perspective. And also the regulation of 20 who's carrying out the oversight of these companies, 21 many of which owners are not clearly visible in 22 vehicles. They're not as well known as New Jersey 23 Transit or Coach USA or the larger bus carriers. So 24 it's important to understand who the operations are 25 being managed by. - 9 - 1 We did some data collection and target 2 field observations to get a better handle on the 3 quantity of jitney vehicles in the county, where the 4 busiest corridors are, who the operators are to get 5 a better understanding of frequency of service and 6 what the issues are on the street. Followed by a 7 discussion with some key stakeholders of regulatory 8 approaches of how Hudson County might tackle this 9 issue at a county level and not just municipality by 10 municipality because different towns and cities in 11 the county are affected or impacted by jitney 12 services in different ways. Some areas there's no 13 jitney service. Union City and Jersey City, in 14 particular, there's quite a bit. So our 15 recommendations for action focused on some near term 16 regulatory approaches and with an understanding of 17 what would be necessary in the future for the 18 service planning end of things as far as frequency 19 of service and so forth. 20 The issues we really came to understand 21 are that, first and foremost, oversight is limited 22 and enforcement is a challenge. There is not one 23 dedicated group that's tackling the issue, although 24 the Hudson County Prosecutor's Office has been 25 taking a lead for several years, mainly from the - 10 - 1 fraud perspective, but helping to lead some safety 2 crackdowns in conjunction with New Jersey Motor 3 Vehicle Commission as well as local law enforcement. 4 There's a big separation between who's 5 driving the vehicle, who owns the vehicle and who 6 owns the parent company that might operate an entire 7 fleet. And what we learned from the prosecutor is 8 that the paper trail between these various steps is 9 very hard to follow. And a driver who might be 10 involved in an accident and found to have poor 11 insurance, tracking who is actually insuring the 12 vehicle that he might be leasing for a day is 13 proving difficult. So we need to understand better 14 who the larger companies operating these services 15 are. 16 There's a surplus of service throughout 17 the county and that stems from both a rapidly 18 growing market and the real underpinning problem 19 which is the intense competition between private 20 companies that leads to aggressive driving 21 throughout many of the congested corridors, such as 22 Bergen Line Avenue, as well as an oversupply of 23 service that's contributing to congestion in the 24 county. 25 A very quick graphic here, just to give - 11 - 1 you a sense, the blue bars on the left are 2 traditional fixed-route buses such as New Jersey 3 Transit. The red on the right is jitney. And this 4 is just showing a relative volume of vehicles in 5 certain corridors such as JFK Boulevard, 30th and 6 31st Street in Union City, Bergamot Avenue, 7 etcetera. And there are far more jitney vehicles on 8 the road then fixed route buses, some of which is 9 understandable, because they are smaller vehicles 10 and they don't carry as many passengers. But we 11 also know that in some areas, such as Bergamot 12 Avenue, there are up to ten different companies 13 providing service and it's too much. The 14 competition, once again, is causing problems and 15 causing safety concerns among passengers. However, 16 we want to also acknowledge that the jitneys are 17 serving a very big market. And we're not advocating 18 trying to eliminate the services, we're trying to 19 get a better handle on how to regulate and how to 20 minimize this competition and unnecessary, you know 21 safety problems and so forth. 22 So in the near term we've been discussing 23 a county-wide regulatory body that could be run by 24 an agency such as the Hudson TMA, the Transportation 25 Management Association, which itself is part of the - 12 - 1 Hudson County Improvement Authority. That with the 2 empowerment of local municipalities could really 3 give a broader, county-wide approach to looking at 4 this problem and not leave it to each municipality 5 to try to fend for itself from both traffic and 6 safety perspectives. 7 What this might include is a regular task 8 force, a dedicated task force with two to four full- 9 time patrol officers, either through HCIA or through 10 the county sheriff that would give a county-wide 11 presence, all the time, keeping track on the 12 operations, the safety of the vehicles, the road 13 worthiness of the vehicles. Rather than waiting 14 every three months to do a crackdown, which has 15 proved quite effective over and over, but it's not 16 solving the larger problem. 17 We also want to look at the registration 18 of the jitney operators to allow for more regular 19 inspections, better accountability first and 20 foremost, of these services and who is owning and 21 who is operating the vehicles. The next steps, 22 which -- this is a very complicated issue. There 23 are many things to take into account but ultimately 24 we'd like to see more study given to service zones 25 or routes that might help segment some of these - 13 - 1 services, provide a better balance between the 2 existing fixed route services and the jitneys. And 3 make sure that we're serving the county residents 4 who need the transportation but we're not just 5 letting the free-for-all continue on congested 6 corridors such as JFK or Bergen Line Avenue. And 7 this could also mean limiting the number of vehicles 8 in operation. 9 Next up in our study, we looked at Hudson 10 County Plaza, which will house the sheriff's office, 11 the 9-1-1 center and many human service agencies in 12 the county, located just south of Journal Square in 13 Jersey City. And we were charged with the task of 14 looking at the existing transit in the area and how 15 this facility could better -- could be served once 16 it fully opens by fixed route transit. 17 This map shows, very quickly, that with 18 Hudson County Plaza on the right, two existing Coach 19 USA bus routes travel down Summit Avenue and Baldwin 20 Avenue. And Hudson County -- we are encouraging the 21 county to work with Coach USA to do a fairly simple 22 re-route of its number 3 service on Baldwin Avenue. 23 To travel down Academy Road, William Street and 24 Cornelison Avenue past the Hudson County Plaza site. 25 This would provide users of the site, and - 14 - 1 employees, with fairly quick access to Journal 2 Square, which obviously is a major hub in Jersey 3 City and the county. Not to mention destinations 4 farther south in Hudson County. East -- west from 5 Montgomery Street there's existing transit service 6 from Montgomery and West Side. 7 It's not as easy to re-route this service 8 just because of the grade separation of Montgomery 9 Street and Cornelison. It's not a long walk for 10 those who are able from Montgomery, but the re-route 11 is easiest with the Coach USA route. And what's 12 important to know for this study too is that as both 13 encouragement for Coach USA to either beef up its 14 existing service, because we know that they're 15 facing some service cuts, as well as convince the 16 private operator to do this detour. Some Congestion 17 Mitigation Air Quality Funds or SEMAC Funds could be 18 pursued to provide both additional service on 19 existing bus routes or even a dedicated shuttle 20 service either to Journal Square or to Exchange 21 Place, which would help compliment the existing 22 service that travels north/south near the site. 23 And just one other note on that, we worked 24 with the Hudson County architect to insure that bus 25 stops would be provided at the site both the roads - 15 - 1 passing by Hudson County Plaza essentially travel 2 uphill and they are going to be separated entrances 3 for the various departments in the building. So we 4 made sure that the architect was able to include in 5 their site plans bus stops at both the bottom of the 6 hill and the top of the hill that would facilitate 7 two-way transit traffic. 8 And finally, we were asked to take a 9 special look at Exchange Place, both on behalf of 10 Jersey City as well as New Jersey Transit and the 11 bus operators. Following the closure sometime, I 12 believe, in 2005 of the Exchange Place bus loop 13 which has led to some operational concerns, some 14 conflicts with traffic crossing and the light rail 15 tracks at Montgomery Street and Hudson Street in 16 Jersey City. So what we did was take a quick look 17 at the area and come up with some operational 18 alternatives that we could provide that were fairly 19 easy to implement. Looked at the area and just 20 decided where we could move a few bus stops to focus 21 more on right turns, because this is very important 22 transit hub that we want to maintain, the connection 23 between the many bus routes, the path system, the 24 light rail, the ferries and all the employers in the 25 area of Exchange Place. So we've offered in our - 16 - 1 report some recommendations for re-routing the buses 2 yet maintaining Exchange Place as a viable transit 3 hub. 4 So just to wrap up, our study has focused 5 on areas with the highest transit ridership looking 6 to really get the best bang for the buck throughout 7 the county of where most people are riding buses. 8 We've engaged the public and stakeholders throughout 9 and have gotten a lot of good feedback from both bus 10 riders as well as representatives from each 11 municipality and we believe we have developed some 12 practical and feasible solutions. 13 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Thank you, 14 Chris. Thank you very much. 15 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 16 are there any questions for Mr. Henry? 17 MR. FITZGIBBONS: I have a few. 18 My town -- where I live, does not permit the shuttle 19 buses in so far as commercial use, you know, picking 20 up passengers. Does the state have any regulations, 21 you know, to regulate the people -- the companies? 22 Are there special licenses for these buses? 23 MR. HENRY: What we found to be 24 the biggest problem is the fact that many of these 25 companies apply for interstate operating authority. - 17 - 1 And that's federal interstate, there's the state 2 licenses. The New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission 3 technically is a licensing authority for these 4 services in New Jersey. However, an operator who 5 has interstate authority, which is fairly easy to 6 obtain, is essentially beyond the control, from what 7 we understand from a legal perspective, of the state 8 or an individual municipality. And what we're not 9 only seeing is that most of these operators have 10 interstate authority but they might not actually be 11 going into New York. Some operators do go through 12 the tunnels; serve the Port Authority bus terminal 13 in Manhattan. Some, we found, essentially turn 14 around at Journal Square or maybe operate one or two 15 trips through the tunnel to, kind of, skate by with 16 the interstate authority but they're essentially 17 operating local service. But from a legal 18 perspective it's been a challenge and we've heard 19 this from the Hudson County Prosecutor as well, to 20 adequately restrict or control specific operations 21 of a company that has this interstate authority, 22 which essentially trumps the local or state 23 operating authority. 24 MR. FITZGIBBONS: But if a 25 company is using our roads and all, do they have - 18 - 1 to -- don't they have to go through our inspection 2 procedures if that vehicle was -- 3 MR. HENRY: They do and I believe the 4 larger companies -- New Jersey Motor Vehicles -- the 5 MVC again does arrange for inspections on a regular 6 basis. Clearly there's a disconnect between keeping 7 track of all these operators or a company might have 8 a fleet registered of a hundred vehicles but they 9 might actually have 150 out there. So the 10 inspections aren't going as far as they should, even 11 if on paper the intent is there to track each of 12 these vehicles. 13 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: What 14 type of license do they have to have? 15 MR. HENRY: The operator or the 16 driver specifically? 17 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: The 18 driver. 19 MR. HENRY: If the vehicle is 20 small enough, up to about a fifteen or so passenger 21 van, no special license. A large enough vehicle 22 will warrant a commercial driver's license, a CDL, 23 but many of these vans are fairly small and don't 24 actually require a special licensing. So it's very 25 easy for a driver to get -- to lease a vehicle for a - 19 - 1 day or for a month or whatever period of time and be 2 out there on the road without formal training, 3 without enough oversight from a company level and 4 certainly without enough oversight from the state 5 level. 6 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: We're 7 going to run into a problem with New York City as a 8 zone free traffic congestion, a law the they're 9 going to pass and they're going to raise the rates 10 and all. And mass transit -- and the governor said 11 it, that they might not be able to handle the new 12 commuters from this. 13 MR. HENRY: And again, I would 14 just underscore that our intent with this study is 15 not to eliminate the jitney services, but to better 16 understand who is operating what and how they can be 17 regulated to make them a viable component of the 18 transit system rather than the problem that they're 19 seen as today. 20 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: Well, 21 I'm going to tell you something, ever get behind one 22 of those guys? Did you ever drive and get behind 23 one of those guys? 24 MR. HENRY: Yes. 25 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: They - 20 - 1 pull all over to pull out, I mean -- I mean, you 2 have to do more regulation. There has to be heavy 3 code enforcement on one of those vehicles. They 4 have to be ticketed. They have to make sure they 5 have the proper -- I mean, this is -- this is a big 6 problem, big problem. So I hope you -- this could 7 solve some of it. 8 MR. HENRY: We hope so too. 9 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Thank you. 10 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 11 at this point I believe each commissioner was given 12 a copy of the final draft of the Urbitran study. If 13 over the next thirty days, between now and the July 14 meeting, if you could take a look at it. If you 15 have any comments we will certainly incorporate that 16 into the record. And if the board would entertain a 17 motion to approve it at the July meeting I think 18 that would be appropriate. And then forward it to 19 the Freeholder board for their consideration. 20 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: All right. 21 Sounds good. 22 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Mr. 23 Chairman, I just have one question. In terms of 24 timetable and implementing some of these 25 improvements, is that on the study or do we have to - 21 - 1 obtain funding to do that? 2 MR. HENRY: We're structuring 3 the study in such a way that as we get final 4 feedback from our technical advisory committee and 5 so forth, and we rank the recommendations that we've 6 offered they will have an estimated price ranking, 7 essentially as I said before, in order of both 8 feasibility and maximum impact. And we will assign 9 a general time frame to that. Some of the 10 recommendations are nothing more than paint on the 11 street, others are more involved and more complex 12 that would require either further study or 13 additional funding. 14 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Is 15 funding already in place for that or we'll have to 16 obtain funding? 17 MR. HENRY: I'm sorry? 18 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Is funding 19 already in place to implement these suggestions or 20 do we have to obtain -- 21 SECRETARY MARKS: That would be 22 subject -- Mr. Chairman, that would be subject to 23 funding opportunities from both the New Jersey 24 Department of Transportation as well as the North 25 Jersey Transportation Planning Authority, NJTPA, - 22 - 1 makes money available for improvements such as this 2 either through the Congestion Mitigation Air Quality 3 Funding, CMAQ, or through the -- it's not local 4 scoping, but another pot of money that they make 5 available. 6 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: All right. 7 Any other questions, commissioners? Thank you, 8 Chris. And we'll -- do we need a motion for the 9 next meeting or no? 10 SECRETARY MARKS: Well, if we 11 could put it on the agenda for the next meeting to 12 have an endorsement. 13 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: This way the 14 rest of the commissioners can review it. 15 SECRETARY MARKS: Right. 16 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: All right. 17 Thank you. 18 MR. PASSAN: Can the public say 19 something about this -- may I ask a question? 20 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: About this 21 presentation? Surely. Before you start, sir, as I 22 mentioned earlier I'm going to need you say your 23 name clear for the court stenographer. We do have a 24 very lengthy agenda tonight. We have four -- 25 MR. PASSAN: I'll be brief. - 23 - 1 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: No, I know. I 2 just want to make a statement to everyone else in 3 the room. Since we have fourteen applications, we 4 are going to limit the time per application to five 5 minutes for the public speaking part. There's a 6 great deal of people here and there's a great deal 7 of applications. All right? Okay. 8 MR. PASSAN: My name is Sam 9 Passan. I wrote to the Urbitran people to make the 10 point that at this time there's no bus service to 11 Liberty State Park which is an outrage. My late 12 father is the father of Liberty State Park, Morris 13 Passan. For years he worked to get bus service to 14 the park. There -- the only way to get to the park 15 is by light rail or by driving. Coach USA used to 16 have the bus 231 that would go from the Heights -- 17 the square down Rose Street to the park. So I urge 18 the county, urge the Urbitran people to do 19 everything they can. Coach USA, I think, is the 20 biggest bus company in the world. I think they owe 21 it to this community to get people to the urban 22 state park that we all love so much and especially 23 senior citizens and everyone's stuck in their homes, 24 summer weekend, people need access to Liberty State 25 Park. And also, I'm working now in the Hamilton - 24 - 1 Park neighborhood. There's no bus that goes to 2 Hamilton Park area in Jersey City. So I hope 3 something can be done about that. Okay. Thank you 4 very much. 5 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Thank you. 6 MS. GRIMM: Katherine Grimm. I 7 am in agreement with Sam about the bus to Liberty 8 State Park. And also along Carfield Avenue, as I 9 understand it, there's no longer any bus 10 transportation along Carfield Avenue which puts a 11 hindrance on the workers that are down in the 12 industrial area down around Liberty State Park and 13 Lynden Avenue. And I also feel there should be a 14 total comprehensive traffic study of all traffic in 15 and out of the area coming in from New York, from 16 Route 3 into the tunnels and how it flows in and out 17 of the municipalities. Until then I don't think we 18 can really push for mass transit unless we know how 19 the flow is and how to alleviate the congestion. 20 And also with these shuttle buses, that they have 21 hybrid buses now that they're putting on the -- that 22 are being manufactured. And if there's some way of 23 mandating that these buses be hybrids so that 24 there's less pollution in this area, which is number 25 one in pollution in the state. Thank you. - 25 - 1 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Thank you. 2 MS. SCARGA: Mia Scarga, 89 3 Mercer Street. I'll be very brief. I'm a big user 4 of the jitney buses and have written various letters 5 to the editor supporting them. I live downtown, as 6 a matter of fact that's how I got here tonight and 7 how I go everywhere. I think they are tremendous 8 asset because on the 2000 census forty percent of 9 the residents of Jersey City do not own a car, I'm 10 one of them. Okay. And that percentage will 11 probably go higher. One recommendation I've made to 12 the SID on Central Avenue, I -- you know, I'm here 13 twenty-four years. I use doctors all over the place 14 and it's always predicated on their location to mass 15 transit. Half my doctors are around Crest Hospital. 16 I've used doctors on Central Avenue. And I said to 17 them, why do they all have to go down Palisade 18 Avenue. Now it's fabulous that I can -- I can catch 19 wait five minutes if I could catch one to go down 20 Central Avenue because it's a long walk from 21 Palisade to Central Avenue. I used to go to a 22 podiatrist there and I changed and go to one now at 23 St. John's. It was too long of a walk. And a lot 24 of other people feel the same way. You could 25 encourage more business for Central Avenue by - 26 - 1 dividing the route instead of everybody going down 2 Palisade Avenue. And sometimes I'm on those jitneys 3 and there's only two, three, four people, that's 4 still two, three, four cars that are off the street. 5 And coming up to a place like this during the day, 6 there's no parking. So I would encourage you to 7 consider adding more routes and having fewer of them 8 going down Palisade Avenue. Thank you very much. 9 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Just so 10 everyone knows, we're not regulating. This is just 11 in the preliminary stages. This is a presentation 12 of how we can make it better down the road. 13 MS. SCARGA: Well, that's what 14 the considerations is, is to expand it. Because 15 I've read the letters where people said take them 16 out, take them out. So what are you going to do, 17 add more cars when there isn't enough -- there's too 18 much traffic to begin with. So they do provide a 19 major service to the community and it could be much 20 better then they are by expanding the routes. Thank 21 you. 22 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: All right. 23 Thank you. Thank you, Chris. 24 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 25 at this point in the agenda it's time for the - 27 - 1 memorialization of resolutions approved of last 2 meeting. Beginning with the MSMP-04 Township of 3 North Bergen, Municipal Stormwater Management Plan 4 for North Bergen; SP-103-06, Vito Lanzone, Jr., 5 located at 2109-2127 Kennedy Boulevard in North 6 Bergen; SP-01-07, Liberty Park at Union City, LLC, 7 located at 38th Street and Hackensack Plank Road in 8 Union City and application SP-03-07 Dublin 9 Properties, LLC, located at 9255-9271 Kennedy 10 Boulevard in North Bergen. Do I have a motion? 11 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: I'll 12 make a motion. 13 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Second. 14 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 15 on a motion made by Commissioner Bettinger seconded 16 by Commissioner Avagliano, Commissioner Arencibia? 17 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Aye. 18 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 19 Avagliano? Commissioner Bettinger? 20 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: Aye. 21 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 22 DeDomenico -- I'm sorry, DeDomenico is not here. 23 Commissioner Fitzgibbons? 24 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 25 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner - 28 - 1 Holloway? 2 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Aye. 3 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 4 Commissioner Mehta has -- let the record reflect 5 that Commissioner Mehta is present. Commissioner 6 Mehta? 7 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Abstain. 8 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 9 NG? 10 COMMISSONER NG: Aye. 11 SECRETARY MARKS: Chairman 12 Choffo? 13 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: I vote Aye. 14 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 15 the motion passed. Mr. Chairman, the next section 16 is 6B, Application Declared To Be Exempt beginning 17 with SP-34-07, Patricia E. Sedegin, located at 302- 18 304 Communipaw Avenue in Jersey City; application 19 SP-35-07, NY SMSA d/b/a Verizon Wireless, located at 20 201 Broadway in Bayonne; application SP-36-07, Louis 21 Cribairo, applicant located at 3611-23 Park Avenue 22 in Union City; application SP-38-07, Hoboken YMCA 23 located at 1301 Washington Street in Hoboken and 24 application SD-41-07, Homatie Raghu located at 6-8 25 Front Street in Jersey City. Do I have a motion? - 29 - 1 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Motion. 2 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: I second 3 it. 4 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 5 on a motion made by Commissioner Holloway, seconded 6 by Commissioner Mehta, Commissioner Arencibia? 7 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Aye. 8 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 9 Avagliano? 10 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 11 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 12 Bettinger? 13 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: Aye. 14 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 15 Fitzgibbons? 16 COMMISSONER FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 17 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 18 Holloway? 19 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Aye. 20 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 21 Mehta? 22 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 23 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 24 NG? 25 COMMISSIONER NG: Aye. - 30 - 1 SECRETARY MARKS: Chairman 2 Choffo? 3 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: I vote aye. 4 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 5 the motion passed. Mr. Chairman, the next section 6 to be considered it 6C on the agenda, Site Plans and 7 Subdivisions Scheduled for a Public Hearing. 8 Beginning with application SD/SP-100-06, Felipe O. 9 Neyra, located at 4108-4110 and 4114 Kennedy 10 Boulevard in Union City. 11 MR. IZQUIERDO: Good evening 12 members of the board. My name is Jose Izquierdo. 13 I'm entering my appearance for the record. I'm an 14 attorney at law. I'm also the architect for the 15 application. This is an application. It's the site 16 plan approval -- 17 SECRETARY MARKS: Excuse me one 18 second, sir. I'm sorry. 19 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Mr. Jose 20 Izquierdo is representing me in a different case 21 which has nothing to do with this case. But because 22 of that I will excuse myself from this. 23 SECRETARY MARKS: Thank you 24 Commissioner Mehta. 25 MR. IZQUIERDO: Thank you, Mr. - 31 - 1 Mehta. This is an application for site plan 2 approval and subdivision. This board gains 3 jurisdiction of the application because it's located 4 on a county road. The Zoning Board of Adjustment of 5 the City of Union City approved a three-family house 6 raised on top of a parking garage consisting of 7 three vehicles on July 27, 2006 and it was 8 memorialized on November -- on September 24, 2006. 9 The property is twenty-five by a hundred. All the 10 side yards, front yards and everything have been 11 approved by the board. It's a dual application. 12 The applicant presents itself before the case 13 besides that approval, that issues which have been 14 addressed and, I believe, that the county engineer 15 has been satisfied in terms of the sewer, the county 16 road opening permit. The applicant agrees to follow 17 and obtain all necessary municipal and county 18 approvals. The subdivision is basically a paper 19 subdivision since the property at 4108-4410, which 20 is building used for the sale of cars and mechanic 21 shop will remain as is. The property at 4114 22 presently used as a used car sales lot will be 23 converted to a two-family -- to a three-family house 24 with three parking spaces. I have nothing further. 25 SECRETARY MARKS: Is the - 32 - 1 applicant's architect or engineer here to show the 2 board -- 3 MR. IZQUIERDO: I am the 4 architect. 5 SECRETARY MARKS: All right. 6 MR. IZQUIERDO: I am the 7 architect as well as the attorney. And actually the 8 applicant was downstairs. But he had a case of acid 9 reflux in the stomach. I gave him a Tagament and I 10 sent him home. I told him it was not necessary for 11 him to be here. He owns this property with his 12 wife. 13 SECRETARY MARKS: Do you have 14 anything that you could show the board? 15 MR. IZQUIERDO: In terms of 16 drawings? 17 SECRETARY MARKS: Correct. 18 MR. IZQUIERDO: Oh, yes. We 19 have filed drawings with, I believe, Medina 20 Consulting Engineers and we have been through with 21 (indiscernible) in terms of the sewer manholes, the 22 connection to that. We will not be disturbing the 23 county road because actually as per the -- favorably 24 to the applicant, there is a sanitary and a storm 25 sewer line that flows underneath the sidewalk. So - 33 - 1 we will be able to connect the sanitary and the 2 storm line right underneath the sidewalk. We will 3 not need to cross Kennedy Boulevard at 42nd Street 4 which is right across Town Hall in North Bergen. 5 But yes, I do have drawings and I do have letters 6 and everything addressing all the constraints and 7 the applicant has fully complied with everything. 8 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: All right. 9 Because you've been in front of this board before, 10 right Mr. Izquierdo? 11 MR. IZQUIERDO: Yes, I have. 12 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: All right. 13 Usually the presentation -- usually the presentation 14 some of the board members would like to see a visual 15 of what's taking place in terms of what we're voting 16 on. 17 MR. IZQUIERDO: I can present 18 this specifically for the board. These are the 19 reduced eleven by seventeen drawings it's for a 20 three-family house. All the buildings to my right 21 and all the buildings to my left are the same 22 height. And I'm basically eliminating a used car 23 lot -- 24 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: All right. 25 MR. IZQUIERDO: -- which sells - 34 - 1 used cars. I'll get these two you. 2 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Can we just -- 3 you can just pass that around so the board members 4 could see it before we vote on it. And Commissioner 5 Arencibia, do you have any questions on this? 6 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: I 7 believe the Medina Consultants reviewed the plans 8 and the applicant has addressed all of the 9 questions. 10 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Mr. Reimon? 11 MR. REIMON: Edward Reimon from 12 Medina Consultants. We've been through three rounds 13 of reviews for this site plan and they have, 14 actually, addressed all the comments that we issued 15 for this application, including the reduction of 16 number of cars inside the building. Initially they 17 had five cars and we made them go down to three just 18 because it's a three-family home. Also they have, 19 as he mentioned, he addressed the issue of tying 20 into the existing sewer line that is under the 21 sidewalk. That is actually under the jurisdiction 22 of North Alston Municipality -- I'm sorry, it's not 23 under the jurisdiction of the county. 24 I have the full-sized drawings 25 and also the full-size drawings were supplied to - 35 - 1 Steve Marks. 2 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: I have a 3 question. Some of the vehicles (indiscernible) what 4 vehicles, are they underneath the homes or are they 5 outside? 6 MR. IZQUIERDO: No, no, no. 7 They're -- what we're intending to do is have three 8 levels of apartment, all three three-bedrooms each 9 with a car -- it's not your typical two-family home 10 that you have an illegal apartment behind the 11 garage. Everything is raised on to a steel 12 structure (indiscernible) and then the parking is 13 underneath and the apartments are on top. 14 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: My 15 concern is, are they able to turn around inside or 16 do they have to back out? 17 MR. IZQUIERDO: Yes, that's why 18 we reduced the number of vehicles, yes. 19 MR. REIMON: The number of 20 vehicles was reduced because five cars could not 21 really get around and come out. Now three vehicles 22 are going -- are not going to turn around either. 23 What they're going to do is, they're going to back 24 out. But it's a better traffic circulation in and 25 out then having five cars inside the garage. - 36 - 1 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: I 2 understand that but -- 3 MR. REIMON: So it's going to -- 4 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: I 5 understand that but that's a serious problem, 6 backing out of that driveway. They should be able 7 to turn around. 8 MR. REIMON: There is no problem 9 for a (indiscernible). You don't have enough 10 width -- 11 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: You 12 don't have enough width. 13 MR. REIMON: -- to provide a K 14 turn. This is (indiscernible) typical one, two or 15 three family house that has a driveway and just a 16 space to put a space in the garage. 17 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: What is 18 the street that they are coming out on, Mr. 19 Chairman? 20 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Kennedy 21 Boulevard. 22 MR. REIMON: It's coming out to 23 Kennedy Boulevard. 24 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: Oh no, 25 that's bad. - 37 - 1 MR. REIMON: The only reason why 2 is -- we don't believe it's going to be such a 3 (indiscernible) to the traffic on Kennedy Boulevard 4 is because the location of the driveway has enough 5 (indiscernible) because it's between two traffic 6 signals. 7 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Do you 8 have a bigger diagram to show us? 9 MR. REIMON: Yes. 10 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Can we 11 see that. 12 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: I 13 have a question. You say the buildings surrounding 14 is the same height. Are there other buildings there 15 that have parking underneath? 16 MR. REIMON: The existing site 17 is a used car sales -- 18 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: That 19 had parking. 20 MR. REIMON: -- and vehicles 21 come in and out. The reason that the -- that the 22 county engineer has sided with the application, I 23 don't believe, having spoken with him, is because 24 it's going to have a three-family house and the 25 traffic is going to be very little. You're going to - 38 - 1 have a car come in, you know, in the evening when 2 you come back home from work and you'll stay home. 3 And it's located between 42nd and 41st Street, both 4 within traffic signals. We're trying to make a bad 5 situation better. That's why the engineer asked me 6 to reduce from five parking spaces to three parking 7 spaces giving them one parking space for every unit. 8 There are a number of two-family 9 homes located on Kennedy Boulevard, along Jersey 10 City and whatnot. It's a twenty-five by a hundred 11 lot -- 12 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Excuse me one 13 second. Commissioner (indiscernible) is the 14 applicant saying there's hundreds of single family 15 and two-family homes with driveways on Kennedy 16 Boulevard that back out. And that's not really an 17 issue. It would be an issue if it was a used car 18 lot backing out very often, but it's not going to be 19 a safety issue since it's only a -- you know, one or 20 two times a day it may happen. 21 MR. SPEAKER: And Mr. Izquierdo, 22 did you receive Union City's approval for this? 23 MR. IZQUIERDO: Yes. Yes, I do 24 and I have filed that approval. The resolution -- 25 it was actually approved at the meeting of July 27, - 39 - 1 2006 and it was memorialized on September 14, 2006. 2 I believe that Steven Marks has a copy of that 3 application we had filed together with 4 (indiscernible). 5 MR. FITZGIBBONS: I have another 6 question. Is the North Hudson Sewage Authority, did 7 they approve the connecting the sewer lines? 8 MR. IZQUIERDO: I haven't made 9 (indiscernible) connection to the sewer because I 10 have to receive planning board approvals before I 11 continue further with the project. My first step 12 was receiving approval from the Zoning Board of 13 Adjustments of the City of Union City, which I did. 14 And then the second step is Hudson County Planning 15 Board approval. After this it is the applicant's 16 burden to receive all other approvals. As Mr. 17 Reimon has indicated that because the sewer line 18 runs underneath the sidewalk we won't have to cut 19 into Kennedy Boulevard. We won't be disturbing 20 traffic and we will just be connecting underneath 21 the sidewalk, have I misspoken? 22 MR. REIMON: Yeah. Not only 23 that, you are not actually impacting any county 24 sewer line. We have (indiscernible). 25 MR. SPEAKER: That's what I was - 40 - 1 saying I want to add, Mr. Chairman, it was a detail 2 for the concrete curb. It says nine by sixteen. It 3 should be a nine by eighteen curb. 4 MR. IZQUIERDO: Not a problem. 5 MR. SPEAKER: And the county is 6 going to plan on resurfacing the roadway within the 7 next six months. So if you do have any road opening 8 cuts you should do them as soon as possible. 9 MR. REIMON: In reference to 10 that, should it be a combination between him and 11 your office before they actually try to do something 12 else to see if the sidewalk and the curb could be 13 (indiscernible) sidewalk and curb right now on 14 Kennedy Boulevard. 15 MR. SPEAKER: It's brand new. 16 MR. REIMON: What -- we need to 17 do curb and sidewalk because you are disturbing the 18 sidewalk to install the new lines. 19 MR. IZQUIERDO: Agreed. 20 MR. REIMON: So what I'm saying 21 is that since you're going to be disturbing the curb 22 and sidewalk at the same time the county is doing 23 curb and sidewalk, we think those limits. As it is 24 appropriate that you talk to the county to see if 25 instead of you doing the sidewalk and the curb you - 41 - 1 can actually continue in Morris County. 2 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Well, it would 3 be the other way around. We would just skip this 4 area until he is ready to come in and do it. We 5 just don't know if he ever will do it until he gets 6 approval so -- 7 MR. SPEAKER: We don't want to 8 resurface it and then have to rip it back up to run 9 the utility lines. 10 MR. REIMON: What I'm saying is, 11 if we put the money down -- 12 MR. SPEAKER: It's a little 13 complicated. I think the best thing is -- the 14 county will proceed in its project (indiscernible) 15 and that's it. 16 MR. REIMON: I agree with you. 17 Actually, what happened is since the property is now 18 presently used as a used car sales lot we already 19 have a curb done. So we will not have to disturb 20 the curb and the work that the county has done. 21 What we will have to do at the time that we file for 22 the permit is break the sidewalk, without the curb, 23 and then connect to the storm and the sanitary sewer 24 and then replace the curb. And we will place 25 whatever bond -- performance bond, labor and - 42 - 1 materials that will be required by the county. We 2 have no problem with the (indiscernible). 3 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Okay. Any 4 other questions? Do I have a motion? 5 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: I 6 make a motion. 7 COMMISSIONER NG: Second. 8 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 9 on a motion to approve the application made by 10 Commissioner Fitzgibbons seconded by Commissioner 11 Ng. Commissioner Arencibia? 12 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Aye. 13 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 14 Avagliano? 15 COMMISSONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 16 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 17 Bettinger? 18 COMMISSIONER BETTINGER: Aye. 19 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 20 Fitzgibbons? 21 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 22 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner 23 Holloway? 24 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Aye. 25 SECRETARY MARKS: Commissioner - 43 - 1 Mehta? Actually he abstained. Commissioner Ng? 2 COMMISSIONER NG: Aye. 3 SECRETARY MARKS: And Chairman 4 Choffo? 5 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: I vote aye. 6 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 7 the motion passed. 8 MR. IZQUIERDO: Thank you very 9 much. I will leave the subdivision deeds and the 10 deeds with Stephen Marks for them to be executed and 11 memorialized at the next hearing. 12 SECRETARY MARKS: Thank you. 13 Actually Mr. Chairman, for Commissioner Mehta it 14 should be not present, not abstain, he actually 15 recused himself. 16 Mr. Chairman, the next 17 application scheduled for public hearing is SD-19- 18 07, 317 Jersey Avenue LLC, located at 6th Street, 19 which is block 317.5, lot 50A in Jersey City. 20 MR. ALAMPI: Good evening, Mr. 21 Chairman, members of the board. For the record my 22 name is Carmine Alumni, ALAMPI. I'm with the firm 23 of Alampi and DeMarrais in Hackensack. And I 24 represent the applicant 317 Jersey Avenue, LLC. We 25 are actually representing four distinct - 44 - 1 (indiscernible) companies on your agenda this 2 evening. They are also 280 Erie Street, 389 3 Monmouth Street, LLC, and 354 Coles Street, LLC. 4 We filed four distinct and 5 separate applications for county approval of 6 subdivision and each of these parcels are very much 7 identical one with the other but it is proper that 8 we file four separate applications. 9 What I intend to do this evening 10 is to present the first application in great detail, 11 with regard to the subdivision, and although you do 12 not have a site plan review within the scope of this 13 review, since we have already secured site plan 14 approval, we have an architect that we're going to 15 give you a brief exhibition of what we plan to do on 16 the site, because I think you like to have a little 17 context. Clearly the application is a subdivision 18 application. We are building two-family housing and 19 we want to show it to you. 20 The presentation, if I do it 21 this way, it will narrow us then to keep the witness 22 (indiscernible) particulars of each of the LLC 23 applications. Unless you wish for me to go through 24 each application in brief detail each time. But it 25 becomes very redundant but it's up to you. - 45 - 1 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: It's going to 2 be the same presentation? 3 MR. ALAMPI: It will be the same 4 witnesses, presentation. The properties are of 5 equal size. One or two small exceptions which we'll 6 point out to you. They're all the same type of 7 application. 8 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: For the record 9 and for voting purposes we will treat them 10 separately when it comes time for that. But Mr. 11 Calvanico? 12 MR. CALVANICO: I don't see any 13 reason why we couldn't do that. 14 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: All right. 15 MR. ALAMPI: I also would like 16 to bring to the board's attention that this property 17 is in the ownership of the eight different 18 (indiscernible) liabilities of my company -- of my 19 client. So we're only presenting the four 20 applications that we've identified, Jersey, Eerie, 21 Monmouth and Coles. I know that this 22 (indiscernible) because the audience is here. But 23 this is the property that has been commonly referred 24 to as the 6th Street (indiscernible). And for a 25 brief overview I'd like to have (indiscernible) - 46 - 1 former Conwell Property that ran from the 2 (indiscernible) branch in Jersey City and has long 3 been discontinued and abandoned. 4 There are, presently, a number 5 of lawsuits that are filed. One with the federal 6 government, surface transportation board and several 7 others in the superior court. But in dealing with 8 different aspects of the case. But one aspect of 9 the case that hasn't been finalized is the decision 10 of the court to bring subdivision that is a major 11 subdivision, and preliminary site plan approval on 12 these four parcels. I have attached to the exhibit 13 package and to my application the court order of 14 Judge Allen Holden that was issued last year. And 15 that court order erroneously referred to final site 16 plan approval when it was preliminary site plan 17 approval. So it was corrected in October. It was 18 first entered in August of 2006 and corrected by the 19 judge when I brought it to his attention in October 20 of 2006. 21 That court litigation was a 22 result of a series of public hearings and 23 (indiscernible). And what it says to you is that 24 the City of Jersey City through its planning 25 commission and planning board by implementation of - 47 - 1 the Court, has granted major subdivision and a 2 preliminary filing of site plan -- preliminary site 3 plan approval to these parcels. We're here today to 4 finalize the subdivision already granted by court 5 order. With that, I have witnesses from the Shore 6 Department, our engineering firm. And then we'll 7 have Dean (indiscernible) -- Dean Marchetto 8 (phonetic), our architect who will give a 9 presentation on the use of the property. 10 Chairman, I should also note 11 that when we submitted the application we attached 12 the court orders but we did send another copy to 13 Mr. Marks for his review. I know he wanted to study 14 the effect of those court orders. And I am aware 15 that the County of Hudson does have a county-wide, I 16 guess, parks master plan and it does have an 17 historic preservation and open space trust fund and 18 a (indiscernible) space historic preservation 19 implementation plan. I'm aware of that. 20 And I'm also aware, and I 21 know the board is aware and I know the public is 22 aware, that at some time in March of 2005 your 23 Freeholder group did pass a resolution implementing 24 this plan. And in so implementing it included our 25 property as one of these properties identified for - 48 - 1 acquisition. So we are aware that the county, just 2 like the City of Jersey City and other agencies, 3 might secure funding of some type and may obtain the 4 acquisition of this property. That's for another 5 day and another forum and another litigation. At 6 this time, my clients are the owners of this 7 property, are seeking development of this property 8 and have achieved successful review of these 9 applications both at the municipal level and at the 10 county level, in one aspect, and at the state court 11 level. 12 You might recall that I was here 13 last year for a property called Brunswick Street, 14 LLC; 1415 Brunswick Street is part of this section 15 of properties. We appeared before this county board 16 and received subdivision approval after we had 17 received subdivision approval from the City of 18 Jersey City. That property is property that is at 19 grade and does not have what we call the embankment 20 walls on it. The embankment is a structure of walls 21 that are anywhere from fifteen feet to twenty-five 22 feet or so in height that used to house the railroad 23 tracks for the railroad to run over the top of them, 24 alongside 6th Street. So these properties do have 25 the embankment walls situated on them. - 49 - 1 We have filed an 2 application with the City of Jersey City for review 3 of a demolition permit and we have filed a 4 certificate of appropriateness and hardship 5 application to go through the process that the law 6 requires us to go through in order to seek 7 permission for the removal of the wall. The 8 jurisdiction for that issue, the integrity or the 9 removal of the wall lies with, initially, the 10 Historic Preservation Commission of the City of 11 Jersey City. Ultimately, to the Board of Adjustment 12 and then if it's satisfied, ultimately with the 13 Superior Court. That is not before you. 14 What is before you is our 15 request for subdivision approval. With that I'll 16 call our first witness. 17 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Can you swear 18 him in first. 19 MR. CAVANICO: Yes. Please 20 state your name and spell your last name for the 21 record. 22 MR. REMICK: Adam Remick, R-E-M- 23 I-C-K. 24 MR. CALVANICO: Thank you. 25 (Witness is duly sworn) - 50 - 1 MR. CALVANICO: The witness has 2 been sworn, Mr. Chairman. 3 MR. ALAMPI: Thank you. Mr. 4 Remick, can you please give the board the benefit of 5 your educational background and you're licensing and 6 your professional (indiscernible)? 7 MR. REMICK: Certainly. I 8 attended the University Institute of Technology and 9 received a Bachelor's of Science Degree in the field 10 of Civil Engineering. I am licensed in the State of 11 New Jersey as a Civil Engineer. I am a senior 12 project manager with the firm of Schoor DePalma. 13 I've been with that firm for over two and a half 14 years and have been practicing in field of civil 15 engineering for over ten years. 16 I have been qualified as a 17 professional witness in the field of civil 18 engineering in front of numerous planning boards and 19 boards of adjustment in Northern New Jersey as well 20 as in the Passaic court as a certified civil 21 engineer. 22 MR. ALAMPI: Mr. Chairman, will 23 you accept the credentials of our engineering 24 witness? 25 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Yes, we will. - 51 - 1 MR. ALAMPI: Thank you. Now 2 Adam, with regard to the subdivision application, 3 did you supervise and participate in the preparation 4 of these plans that are submitted to the board? 5 MR. REMICK: Yes, I did. 6 MR. ALAMPI: And these are the 7 final plans that were revised as of March 30, 2007 8 and submitted to the board as a resubmission on 9 April 11, 2007? 10 MR. REMICK: That is correct. 11 MR. ALAMPI: And how many 12 exhibits do you have for the 317 Jersey Avenue 13 application? 14 MR. REMICK: At this time I had 15 only planned on presenting one exhibit on the plan, 16 the major subdivision plan. It gives a nice 17 overview of the project. 18 MR. ALAMPI: And maybe you 19 can -- will this pick him up if he stands by the 20 plans? 21 MR. SPEAKER: (Indiscernible). 22 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Thank you, Mr. 23 Marchetto. 24 MR. ALAMPI: Thank you. 25 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Can you bring - 52 - 1 the plans up (indiscernible) so we can see them a 2 little better? You've done that before Dean, huh? 3 MR. ALAMPI: What do we call 4 this plan? 5 MR. REMICK: The plan I'll be 6 discussing is entitled the Final Subdivision Plan 7 for 317 Jersey Avenue, LLC. It is dated 10/21/05, 8 bearing no revision dates and it is one of one. 9 MR. ALAMPI: And just tell us a 10 little bit about the property, its location and the 11 overall dimensions of the property. 12 MR. REMICK: The property is 13 known as block 317.5, lot 50A on the tax maps of 14 Jersey City. It is approximately one half of a 15 block that is bounded by 6th Street on the northerly 16 side and by Coles Street on the westerly side and 17 Jersey Avenue on the easterly side. The southerly 18 side is comprised of other lots that are not under 19 the control of my applicant -- not under the 20 ownership of my applicant. The property is 21 approximately 400 feet in width along 6th Street and 22 one hundred feet deep. It contains approximately 23 0.92 acres in total, prior to subdivision. 24 We are proposing to subdivide 25 this property into sixteen lots, each twenty-five - 53 - 1 foot in width with the exception of the easterly 2 most lot which is slightly larger at 26.3 feet in 3 width. And all lots are to be one hundred feet in 4 depth. These lots are within the R-1 zone district 5 within the City of Jersey City. And this zone 6 district requires a minimum lot area of 2,500 square 7 feet. Each of which lot, at twenty-five by one 8 hundred feet or somewhat larger at 26.3 by one 9 hundred, meet that requirement. 10 In addition, it is required that 11 these lots have a minimum lot width of twenty-five 12 feet and a minimum lot depth of one hundred feet. 13 Each of these lots is fully in conformance with 14 those zoning regulations. 15 MR. ALAMPI: Thank you. Are 16 there any other features to the subdivision that 17 deal with topography or any of those issues? 18 MR. REMICK: Not dealing with 19 the subdivision. The subdivision is a legal 20 subdivision and is not impacted by the topography of 21 the site. There is an easement that is along the 22 southerly portion. It runs in an east/west 23 direction to provide for an access alleyway along 24 the rear of the property. 25 MR. ALAMPI: And that access - 54 - 1 alleyway will be preserved, correct? 2 MR. REMICK: That is correct. 3 In fact as part of this application we are going to 4 enlarge that alleyway easement. It currently exists 5 at a ten foot width, five foot of which is on the 6 subject property, five foot of which is on the 7 adjoining properties. We are proposing to enlarge 8 that by adding to make it a total of twenty foot in 9 width. So it would be fifteen feet on the subject 10 property. 11 MR. ALAMPI: And is any part of 12 this property at or within 200 feet of any county 13 roadway, abutting any county roadway or any county 14 drainage facility? 15 MR. REMICK: No, it is not. 16 MR. ALAMPI: Are there any other 17 features of the zoning schedule, at the top of the 18 exhibit that you would like to emphasize? 19 MR. REMICK: It does specify 20 yard setbacks; however that is a feature of the site 21 plan. I would note that we do meet all of the 22 required minimum and maximum setbacks for any 23 proposed structures. 24 MR. ALAMPI: Has this plan 25 complied completely with the county's requirement - 55 - 1 for the filing of a subdivision plan? 2 MR. REMICK: I believe it has. 3 We did receive a review letter on this project. The 4 one item that I would note within that review letter 5 is, is it requested that the plans and plats shall 6 include a signature block for the county planner or 7 county engineer, which we would certainly comply 8 with. 9 MR. ALAMPI: Now the review 10 letter was initially issued on May 7, 2007? 11 MR. REMICK: That is correct. 12 MR. ALAMPI: And there was a 13 replacement letter dated June 12, 2007? 14 MR. REMICK: That is correct. 15 MR. ALAMPI: And essentially 16 this is a two-page comment, review letter by the 17 county planning department? 18 MR.REMICK: Yes. 19 MR. ALAMPI: And the only 20 comment that addresses your issue, for engineering 21 purposes, is needing the signature block -- 22 MR. REMICK: Correct. 23 MR. ALAMPI: -- as described. 24 Chairman, I have no further questions of this 25 witness. This is a fully conforming subdivision, - 56 - 1 conforming to the municipal ordinances of Jersey 2 City and conforming to the county review 3 jurisdiction for subdivisions. We do note that 4 because of the nature of this property and the fact 5 that the property was listed on a to be acquired 6 list, that you might reiterate that in your review 7 and approval. We certainly know that's part of the 8 history of the property but we don't know if that 9 will ever come to pass. But we certainly recognize 10 that its part of the review letter and if Mr. Marks 11 wants to address any item, I think we've complied 12 with the items in his review letter. 13 SECRETARY MARKS: You said you 14 sought no variances whatsoever? 15 MR. ALAMPI: No variances. 16 SECRETARY MARKS: Any questions 17 commissioners? 18 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: Yes, 19 Jersey City did they approve this? 20 MR. ALAMPI: they were ordered 21 to approve it. It was approved by Judge 22 (indiscernible) when they wrongfully refused to 23 approve it. I attended to those meetings. I made 24 the applications. There was no basis in law to deny 25 it. And it was determined, as a matter of law by - 57 - 1 the Superior Court. And it's the law of the -- of 2 this case. 3 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Go ahead, Mr. 4 Marks. 5 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 6 there are a number of speakers who would like to get 7 their five minutes. Would you like the list or 8 should I read off people as they -- 9 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: I'd like you 10 just to mention, for the record, about Mahwah 11 Township, we spoke about. 12 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 13 I prepared a memorandum for the edification of the 14 board. I would like to reserve my comments until 15 after everybody's spoken. 16 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: All right. 17 That's fine. 18 SECRETARY MARKS: Should I call 19 up the first -- 20 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: You may 21 proceed. 22 MR. ALAMPI: Mr. Chairman, I'm 23 sorry. Before you do call the public, do you want 24 to take a look at the site plan although it's not 25 part of the project; do you want Mr. Marchetto's - 58 - 1 profile on the site planning? It's not part of the 2 application. It's not necessary -- it's up to you. 3 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: I 4 think we're here to approve one thing tonight, not 5 their site plan. That's another night. 6 MR. SPEAKER: You're absolutely 7 correct. The site plan is not required. We don't 8 have to get into it -- could we just stick to -- 9 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Since we're -- 10 yes, I'm sorry. Since we're voting on the 11 subdivision, we'll keep it with the subdivision. 12 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: Okay. 13 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: All right. Go 14 ahead, Mr. Marks. You can -- 15 SECRETARY MARKS: Eric Fleming 16 from the Harsimus Cove Association President. 17 MS. SPEAKER: He had to leave. 18 SECRETARY MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 19 he had to leave. Jennifer Myer. 20 MS. MYER: I have some visuals. 21 MR. ALAMPI: Mr. Chairman, I'm 22 going to object to any (indiscernible) as required, 23 prior to tonight's hearing. Any matters -- any 24 applications should be on file. I'm going to raise 25 an objection to exhibits being handed in. I have no - 59 - 1 way to authenticate them. I have no way to 2 challenge how they were prepared and who prepared 3 them. With that objection on the record, you may 4 wish to overrule me and look at them anyway, but 5 that's my objection. 6 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: I've 7 got a question. What kind of visuals are they? 8 MS. MYER: What they are is, 9 they're just some basic pictures for those of you 10 who might not be familiar with the property as it is 11 today because it's actually a very unique property. 12 SECRETARY MARKS: Excuse me. 13 Excuse me one second. Can you just state your name 14 once again, clearly, for the record? 15 MS. MYERS: My name is Jennifer 16 Myers. I reside at 495 Monmouth Street and I'm 17 president of the Embankment Preservation Coalition. 18 SECRETARY MARKS: Thank you. 19 MS. MYERS: And there's also, 20 just a conceptual plan of, you know, the park idea 21 which -- 22 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: 23 That's -- you're saying what could be there, right. 24 We want to know what's there now. 25 MS. MYERS: There's photos which - 60 - 1 shows you some different views on (indiscernible). 2 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: All right. 3 Before we do that I just want Mr. -- our counsel's 4 advice on this. Mr. Calvanico? 5 MR. CALVANICO: My advice to the 6 board would be to allow the documentation. We note 7 Mr. Alampi's objection for the record. We should 8 allow the documents at this point. I would ask that 9 he be allowed to view them first before -- 10 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Do you have 11 additional copies you could provide a copy to Mr. 12 Alampi? 13 MS. MYERS: I wish I did. I'm 14 sorry. 15 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: All right. 16 MS. MYERS: I just wanted to 17 clarify that we had been told, you know, at the 18 Embankment Preservation Coalition and we represent, 19 you know, hundreds of people in the community and we 20 had been told that we could bring some people up to 21 talk. So we had a number of people who are just 22 going to make -- we asked them to make some points 23 which we thought were relevant. So we'll try and 24 really move quickly through this. 25 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: All right. - 61 - 1 MS. MYERS: So should I just 2 make my statement? 3 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Go ahead. Mr. 4 Alampi, go ahead. 5 MR. ALAMPI: Mr. Chairman, I 6 raised the objection to these exhibits, they were 7 two-fold. And I understood your attorney's 8 recommendation. There is one exhibit which is 9 photographs that do not appear to be (indiscernible) 10 in the photographs. Although I object to them, my 11 concern that what's embellished (indiscernible). I 12 think that that's inappropriate. That the 13 photograph itself may be examined, if you weigh that 14 out. The other exhibits though appear to be 15 fabricated by either this coalition or a people in 16 conjunction with them about what could be or should 17 be. There's no scale, there are no dimensions, there 18 are no costs analysis. So I would break my 19 objection into two parts. Although I objected to 20 the photographs, if you wish to have your attorney 21 rule on the photographs you can pass them around. I 22 think it would be wrong, however, to take visuals, 23 sketches and such, that are not prepared by a 24 licensed professional, that are not scaled, about 25 what could be there because that's not there. - 62 - 1 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Uh-huh. 2 MR. ALAMPI: It's zone R-1 3 residential. With that, I'd ask your counsel, 4 maybe, to break down my objection. He may sustain, 5 you know, part of it and overrule the other part of 6 it. What I'm sticking to is the prejudicial factor 7 of looking at what might be there on private 8 property. 9 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: I understand. 10 And I -- my comment and if any of the other 11 commissioners have a comment, they'll get to respond 12 also is that this is not going to be submitted as 13 evidence, I believe. So it's a matter of just the 14 commissioner viewing it unless -- 15 COMMISSIONER FITZGIBBONS: Also, 16 as we heard in the beginning, either Jersey City or 17 the county might want to take that property over and 18 develop at -- whatever they want to do with it as 19 far as Green Acres, whatever they're going to do 20 there. So these pictures here, even though they 21 might be nice, but there might be some other ideas 22 for that space if the county takes it over. 23 MS. MYERS: Yes, absolutely. 24 And this is a concept that's based on the 25 conversations we had with the city and the scale is, - 63 - 1 you know, as described. The one hundred by 400 foot 2 lots. But you know, it's just a concept just to let 3 you know what the committee has been talking about. 4 So if you'll allow them and then I'll just make my 5 brief statement. 6 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: We'll allow 7 them. Go ahead. 8 MS. MYERS: Again. My name is 9 Jennifer Myers. I am president of the Embankment 10 Preservation Coalition. We're a non-profit. We 11 formed to preserve the Pennsylvania (indiscernible) 12 and Embankment which is the massive stone elevated 13 railway and promote its reuse as a passive park and 14 greenway. The four properties under consideration 15 for subdivision tonight are part of this rail right 16 of way. We have an organization of approximately 17 850 supporters and dues paying members. In 18 addition, dozens of non-profit organizations 19 throughout the region have endorsed our goals. 20 Thousands of county residents have signed our 21 petitions and we have called for the embankment 22 preservation and reuse of the Passive Park and 23 greenway and help the City of Jersey City raise the 24 funds to acquire the property. 25 Many members of our coalition - 64 - 1 are here tonight. They're going to give various 2 reasons why the county planning board should not 3 approve these subdivision applications, in brief. 4 The subdivision for residential development 5 conflicts with the county planning priorities, 6 anticipates the demolition of a historic structure, 7 destroys a rare habitat corridor, has a continuous 8 right of way in existence for 150 years, paves the 9 way for increasing flooding and problems in a flood 10 plane and adds to the Hudson River (indiscernible) 11 combines sewer outflows. Last but not least, the 12 City of Jersey City lead a petition before the 13 Federal Surface Transportation Board contesting sale 14 of the properties to the developers LLC without 15 first following federal rail abandonment 16 regulations. That ruling is expected shortly. 17 Isn't this putting the cart before the horse to 18 consider subdivisions before the STB rules? I ask 19 the planning board to deny the subdivisions 20 requested. Thank you. 21 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: All right. 22 Thank you. 23 SECRETARY MARKS: Richard James? 24 MR. JAMES: Good evening. 25 Richard James, 49 (indiscernible) Avenue. I don't - 65 - 1 think I've figured out this microphone yet. I am 2 going to have to ask Mr. Alampi one question before 3 I begin my one minute speech. Mr. Alampi, are you 4 aware of any of the final orders which you 5 referenced in your presentation being under appeal? 6 MR. ALAMPI: The appeal has not 7 been followed, to my knowledge, as not in effect. 8 Nonetheless, Mr. Chairman, I'm not answering 9 questions. The court order stands. There's no stay 10 on the order. 11 MR. JAMES: I guess I thought I 12 had the right to ask people who made presentations 13 questions. If I've broken your rules, I apologize. 14 In any event, with good reason the site plan and 15 subdivision resolution this board is authorized to 16 enforce is silent on the entire matter of rail 17 lines. This is largely because lines of rail are 18 federally regulated. The Embankment Preservation 19 Coalition with the City of Jersey City and others 20 has petitioned the Federal Surface Transportation 21 Board alleging that this rail corridor, part of 22 which is the subject of this subdivision hearing, 23 has never been subject to the requisite federal rail 24 abandonment procedures. This federally mandated 25 procedure, by the way, constitutes a federal permit - 66 - 1 and it triggers other federal environmental and 2 cultural resource reviews. 3 The STB has accepted our 4 petition and is still studying the matter. It has 5 yet to render a decision and of course has yet to 6 impose any other number of remedies that would be a 7 consequence of that decision. Hence, a 8 (indiscernible) decision by this board would bring 9 out the regulatory authority of a higher 10 governmental authority. The STB decision might well 11 effect ownership of this property and/or impose 12 substantial restraints upon any current or future 13 private or public owner. Ultimately, this board's 14 actions must depend upon the ruling of the Surface 15 Transportation Board. We ask that your actions 16 tonight reflect this. Thank you. 17 (Applause) 18 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Thank you. 19 SECRETARY MARKS: Peter Delman. 20 MR. DELMAN: My name is Peter Delman, 21 D-E-L-M-A-N from 263 Fifth Street. Major 22 responsibilities of the County Planning Board are to 23 prepare and adopt a master plan for the county's 24 physical development and two, to encourage municipal 25 cooperation in matters of mutual and regional - 67 - 1 concern. I ask you to deny these subdivision 2 applications because they undermine the Hudson 3 County Master Plan and Open Space Plan. The 4 municipality of Jersey City Master Plan and draft 5 Open Space Plan and Recreation Plan and the 6 endorsement of twenty-six New Jersey municipalities 7 and six county governing bodies for the route of the 8 East Coast Greenway. Thank you. 9 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Thank you. 10 (Applause) 11 SECRETARY MARKS: John Crowley 12 Delman. 13 MR. DELMAN: John Crowley 14 Delman, 263 Fifth Street, Jersey City. Subdivision 15 of the embankment would make a mockery of the County 16 Master Plan. Here are just a few examples of the 17 dozens of general land use, circulation, community 18 facility, conservation and historic preservation 19 goals that directly conflict with subdividing this 20 historic structure and right of way. 21 First, preserve the character of 22 existing well-established neighborhoods and protect 23 them from the incompatible development. The 24 embankment runs between two national historic 25 districts and is integral to them. - 68 - 1 Second, integrate waterfront 2 development with adjacent neighborhoods by assuring 3 strong physical linkages. The embankment 4 transportation corridor runs west/east and connects 5 interior neighborhoods to new development and the 6 north/south Hudson River waterfront walkway at 6th 7 Street. 8 Third, promote transit and use 9 of alternate transportation modes. The embankment 10 is part of the route for the East Coast Greenway, a 11 walking, biking path from Maine to Florida, 12 recommended in a 2004 NJ DOT study. An NJ transit 13 study is also underway on the feasibility of using 14 part of the embankment for light rail. 15 Fourth, promote connections to 16 the Secaucus transfer station. Mayor Healy's light 17 rail proposal for part of the embankment promotes 18 this connection. 19 Fifth, preserve existing scenic 20 vistas. The embankment provides unique scenic views 21 of two national historic districts and the Hudson 22 River waterfront. 23 Finally, promote culture and 24 tourism. The East Coast Greenway is expected to 25 spurt eco-historic tourism along this route. And - 69 - 1 the embankment segment is anticipated to be a 2 destination as well as a connector. How does 3 demolition of historic structure and replacement of 4 the typical residential development meet the spirit 5 and letter of the master plan? Thank you. 6 (Applause) 7 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Thank you. 8 SECRETARY MARKS: Christina 9 Donelly? 10 MS. DONELLY: Christina Donelly. 11 I live at 250 Fifth Street. The Hudson County Open 12 Space Plan lists the 6th Street embankment as the 13 county's priority number 3 for open space 14 acquisition. In addition, the plan recommends the 15 implementation of pedestrian and bicycle paths in 16 general and the East Coast Greenway specifically. 17 It urges building of the proposed open space shown 18 on the official green map. This map marks the 6th 19 Street embankment as a walkway, bikeway and historic 20 site. I ask you to not approve these subdivisions. 21 (Applause) 22 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Thank you. 23 SECRETARY MARKS: Steven 24 Guciardi? 25 MR. GUCIARIDI: Good evening. - 70 - 1 My name is Steven Guciardi. I live at 302 Pavonia 2 Avenue. The Pennsylvania railroad (indiscernible) 3 to extend embankment is listed on the state register 4 of historic places. It's eligible for the national 5 register. It is a Jersey City municipal landmark 6 and it's one of the top ten endangered historic 7 sites listed in the 2006 -- listed in 2006 by the 8 preservation of New Jersey, the state-wide historic 9 preservation organization. We're not talking about 10 subdividing a vacant piece of land here. There is a 11 structure that exists on this property. It's been 12 acknowledged by various organizations and 13 municipalities in this state. And we're talking 14 about knocking down a landmark. We urge that you do 15 not be duplicitous in the destruction of this 16 important site. Thank you. 17 (Applause) 18 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Thank you. 19 SECRETARY MARKS: Bob Perrot. 20 MR. PERROT: My name is Robert 21 Perrot. I live at 31 Eerie Street in downtown 22 Jersey City. This application raises a problem I 23 hope you will consider regarding this application. 24 Jersey City has a combined sewer system which mixes 25 storm water and raw sewage together. During heavy - 71 - 1 rains, combined sewer outflows or, they're called 2 CSOs, pose significant health threats to residents 3 plagued by sewer backups. High levels of 4 contaminated water are sent into the harbor estuary. 5 Now adding residential development with impermeable 6 surfaces to this already overburdened area will only 7 increase this problem while burdening tax payers 8 with costly solutions. Thank you. 9 (Applause) 10 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Thank you. 11 SECRETARY MARKS: Dale Hartman? 12 MR. HARTMAN: Mr. Chairman and 13 commissioners, my name is Dale Hartman. I live at 14 335 3rd Street and across from (indiscernible) 15 section. And I want to basically emphasize the 16 transportation value of the embankment. Since 1857, 17 for over 150 years, the 6th Street embankment has 18 been part of a transportation corridor. It doesn't 19 make any sense for the county board of planning to 20 further approve the demise of this corridor. It was 21 already emphasized by (indiscernible) that our 22 (indiscernible) had spoke on whether it's possible 23 to develop this as a light rail corridor in the 24 future. As well as, we had spoken to you in the 25 beginning about its connection as far as a national - 72 - 1 railway allowance that stretches for 2,500 miles and 2 would bring tourists into this area from Maine to 3 Florida. Well, I suggest that you consider these 4 subdivision applications and deny all four of them. 5 Thank you. 6 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Thank you. 7 (Applause) 8 SECRETARY MARKS: Claire Perrot? 9 MS. PERROT: My name is Claire 10 Perrot. I live at 31 (indiscernible) Street in 11 Jersey City and (indiscernible). 12 Initially it was though the East 13 Coast Greenway would end in New Jersey at Perth 14 Amboy because it would be too difficult to create a 15 safe walking and biking route through Hudson County. 16 It was unthinkable, however, that the state's most 17 densely populated county and second largest city 18 would not be included in this urban trail. The New 19 Jersey Department of Transportation therefore funded 20 a study that not only determined the route but with 21 the inclusion of the embankment and (indiscernible) 22 found one of the most spectacular (indiscernible) 23 along the eastern seaboard. (Indiscernible) the 24 embankment to residential development would derail 25 the route in Hudson County, a terrible disservice to - 73 - 1 its residents. 2 In addition, as I understand it, 3 Jersey City has the least green space per person of 4 any city in New Jersey. The embankment, untouched, 5 provides a corridor of green space both beautiful 6 and useful in terms of flood control between two 7 historic districts. By the way, Harsimus Cove has 8 no other green space. Both New York City and Paris 9 have had the vision to stay similar (indiscernible) 10 railroad embankments and transform them into high 11 line parks that benefit not only the neighborhood 12 but attract interest from all over. 13 Since (indiscernible) plans and 14 open space plans call for Jersey City and Hudson 15 County's acquisition of the embankment, I don't 16 understand how this railroad right of way is even 17 available for consideration of development of 18 subdivision by this board or any board to even 19 consider filing (indiscernible) on such a corridor 20 (indiscernible) houses, more people actually 21 eliminating existing valuable open space. I hope 22 that you will not approve this subdivision. 23 (Applause) 24 CHAIRMAN CHOFFO: Thank you. 25 SECRETARY MARKS: Richard Meyer. - 74 - 1 MR. MEYER: My name is Richard 2 Meyer. I live at 495 9th Street in Jersey City. I 3 wanted to discuss flooding issues. This past May, 4 I'm sure you're all aware of the substantial 5 flooding that we had. And indeed my grandson 6 couldn't go to school for a week because of the 7 flooding which has been attributed b