Planning Board - Special Planning Board Meeting

1 CITY OF UNION CITY HUDSON COUNTY, NEW JERSEY PLANNING BOARD : TRANSCRIPT OF RECORDED SPECIAL MEETING : : PROCEEDINGS ____________ ____: City Hall 3715 Palisade Avenue Union City, New Jersey Tuesday, February 19, 2019 Commencing at 6:07 p.m. M E M B E R S P R E S E N T: YDALIA GENAO, Mayor’s Designee CAROLINA FERNANDEZ RUDY RIVERO ALEJANDRO VELAZQUEZ, Alternate No. 1 JOSE GUARENO, Alternate No. 2 ALICIA MOREJON, Acting Chairperson M E M B E R S A B S E N T: BRIAN P. STACK, Mayor CELIN VALDIVIA, Commissioner FRANKLIN MEDINA JEANNE KOEHLER, Vice Chairperson DIANE CAPIZZI, Chairperson A L S O P R E S E N T: CARLOS VALLEJO, SECRETARY TO THE BOARD MARIAN MIAWAD, ESQ., Attorney for the Board DAVID SPATZ, Consultant, Community Housing & Planning Associates, Inc.  2 I N D E X PAGE CALL TO ORDER 4 SALUTE TO FLAG 5 ROLL CALL 5 ELECTION OF ACTING CHAIRPERSON 7 HEARINGS Non-Condemnation Redevelopment Plan 9 ADJOURNMENT 43  3 I N D E X Non-Condemnation Redevelopment Plan 720 8th Street Redevelopment Area Lot 9 in Block 42 of the City of Union City, New Jersey WITNESS PAGE David Spatz 9 SWORN PUBLIC Larry Price 17  4 1 THE SECRETARY: May I have your attention, 2 please? 3 (Whereupon, there was a pause in the 4 proceedings.) 5 THE SECRETARY: On record? 6 MS. DILLON: Yes. 7 I’m sorry. 8 THE SECRETARY: Please take notice that on 9 Tuesday, February 19, 2019, at six p.m., a 10 Special Meeting is scheduled for the City of 11 Union City Planning Board to be held in the 12 Municipal Chambers of the City Hall, 3715 13 Palisade Avenue, Union City, New Jersey. 14 This is a meeting called in compliance with 15 Chapter 231, Public Law 1975 of the Open Public 16 Meeting Act. 17 Adequate notice of this meeting has been 18 provided as follow: 19 Notice of this meeting, setting forth the 20 time, date, and location, and the agenda, to the 21 extent known, was forwarded to The Jersey 22 Journal, The Record, and The Hudson Reporter, has 23 been posted on the bulletin board in City Hall, 24 and has been made available to the public in the 25 Office of the Municipal Clerk.  5 1 Before we call roll for this meeting, can 2 everybody rise, Pledge of Allegiance? 3 4 (Whereupon, the Pledge of Allegiance was 5 said by all.) 6 7 THE SECRETARY: Thank you. 8 9 ROLL CALL: 10 11 THE SECRETARY: Roll call for tonight’s 12 meeting. 13 Mayor Brian B. Stack? Absent. 14 Diane Capizzi? Absent. 15 Jeanne Koehler? Absent. 16 Ydalia Genao? 17 MS. GENAO: Yes. 18 THE SECRETARY: Commissioner Celin 19 Valdivia? Absent. 20 Carolina Fernandez? 21 MS. FERNANDEZ: Here. 22 THE SECRETARY: Rudy Rivero? 23 MR. RIVERO: Here. 24 THE SECRETARY: Franklin Medina? Absent. 25 Alicia Morejon?  6 1 MS. MOREJON: Here. 2 THE SECRETARY: Alejandro Velazquez? 3 MR. VELAZQUEZ: Here. 4 THE SECRETARY: Jose Guareno? 5 MR. GUARENO: Here. 6 THE SECRETARY: We have six present. 7 We have a full quorum. 8 * * * 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25  7 1 ELECTION OF ACTING CHAIRPERSON: 2 3 MR. SPATZ: Somebody has to nominate 4 Alicia. 5 THE SECRETARY: Okay. 6 I need a nomination to -- for a temporary 7 Chairperson to run the meeting. 8 MR. VELAZQUEZ: I make a nomination for 9 Alicia. 10 THE SECRETARY: Nomination on the table -- 11 MR. GUARENO: Second. 12 THE SECRETARY: -- to Ms. Morejon, be the 13 Acting Chairperson for this meeting. 14 Motion by Mr. -- 15 MR. SPATZ: Velazquez. 16 MR. VELAZQUEZ: Velazquez. 17 THE SECRETARY: -- Velazquez. 18 Seconded by Mr. Guareno. 19 MR. VELAZQUEZ: All in favor? 20 THE SECRETARY: Any other nomination? 21 I see no other nominations. 22 Can -- roll call on the motion. 23 Mr. Velazquez? 24 MR. VELAZQUEZ: Yes. 25 THE SECRETARY: Mr. Guareno?  8 1 MR. GUARENO: Yes. 2 THE SECRETARY: Ms. Genao? 3 MS. GENAO: Yes. 4 THE SECRETARY: Ms. Fernandez? 5 MS. FERNANDEZ: Yes. 6 THE SECRETARY: Mr. Rivero? 7 MR. RIVERO: Yes. 8 THE SECRETARY: Ms. Morejon? 9 MS. MOREJON: Yes. Yes. 10 THE SECRETARY: Six in favor. 11 Motion carries. 12 Acting Chairperson for the meeting, Miss 13 Morejon. 14 (Whereupon, there was a pause in the 15 proceedings.) 16 * * * 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25  9 1 Non-Condemnation Redevelopment Plan, 2 720 8th Street Redevelopment Area 3 Lot 9 in Block 42 of the City of Union City, 4 New Jersey: 5 6 MR. SPATZ: Did you send copies of this to 7 all of them? 8 THE SECRETARY: Yes, I did. Let me just 9 call -- call for the -- 10 MR. SPATZ: Yeah. 11 THE SECRETARY: All right. 12 We -- we have on tonight’s special hearing, 13 Non-Condemnation Redevelopment Plan, 720 8 th 14 Street Redevelopment Area, Lot 9, Block 42 of the 15 City of Union City, New Jersey. 16 Mr. David Spatz, please? 17 MR. SPATZ: Okay. 18 MS. DILLON: Mr. Spatz, let me swear you 19 in. 20 MR. SPATZ: Yes. 21 MS. DILLON: Please raise your right hand. 22 Do you affirm the testimony you’re about to 23 give this Board is the whole truth? 24 MR. SPATZ: Yes, I do. 25 MS. DILLON: Please state your name for the  10 1 record. 2 MR. SPATZ: David Spatz, S-P-A-T-Z. 3 MS. DILLON: Thank you. 4 MR. SPATZ: I’m the Planner for the Board. 5 We had provided, at the request of this 6 Board, a Redevelopment Plan for the 8th Street 7 parking lot property. 8 It was sent to all of the Board members and 9 available to the public, so I’m not going to go 10 through the entire plan. I just give some sort 11 of a brief background, and then go into some of 12 the more critical components of it, and then 13 answer questions. 14 So, towards the end of last year, the Board 15 of Commissioners asked this Board to study 16 whether the 8th Street parking lot met the State 17 criteria to be declared an area in need of 18 redevelopment, and more importantly, a non- 19 condemnation redevelopment area, which means that 20 no city funds are used in order to purchase the 21 property. This site happens to be city property. 22 So, this Board requested that I prepare a 23 report, which we did. We had a public hearing on 24 December 11th of last year. And at that meeting, 25 the Planning Board recommended to the Board of  11 1 Commissioners that the area be declared an area 2 in need of redevelopment. 3 And then, on the 20 -- January 22nd, of 4 this year, the Board of Commissioners adopted 5 that report, declared it an area in need of 6 rehabilitation. And then, the next step is for 7 them to request this Board to prepare a plan 8 which is sort of a mini-zoning ordinance for that 9 particular site. 10 And that’s what we did and it’s for review 11 for the Board. 12 So, the State has set out sort of the 13 composition of this plan. And a lot of the plan 14 is -- you know, hits all of the points that they 15 require. It has a little bit of the statutory 16 history in it. 17 I would just turn to page 15. 18 The area before that is really a 19 description of the process and a description of 20 the plan and what plans do. 21 Page 15 is the section on Urban Design 22 Objectives and Requirements. And this is not 23 traditionally the zoning standards for this, but 24 -- but how they recommend that a plan be 25 developed and designed.  12 1 What we included in this are the design 2 standards that the City has used in their other 3 redevelopment areas and how they suggest 4 buildings be designed to fit in with the area. 5 If you turn to page 17, there’s some 6 information as to circulation and parking, which 7 is particularly critical on this property since 8 it was a parking lot. 9 And -- and what is included in this is a 10 requirement that the existing 71 spaces that 11 currently exist on that parking lot that are 12 available for the public, any development of this 13 site has to maintain those 71 spaces, in addition 14 to the parking that is required for the 15 development. 16 The standard that we’ve used since what is 17 permitted on this site is age restricted housing 18 for seniors, there’s a much lesser standard than 19 is typical. And we had recommended that .5 -- a 20 half a parking space per unit is what is required 21 for that. And so, we have -- you know, some more 22 of the standards for parking. 23 Page 19 really begins the sort of the 24 detailed zoning information, which I think this 25 Board might want to discuss or -- or consider.  13 1 The property, several years ago, the Board 2 of Commissioners amended the Zoning Ordinance to 3 permit age restricted and affordable housing on 4 public properties that were located in the P 5 zone, which is the public zone. This property is 6 within that zone and is recommended to be 7 developed in accordance with those standards. 8 I’ll say that, initially, prior to the 9 creation of the redevelopment plan, a developer 10 of that property came before the Board of 11 Adjustment and sought site plan approval and 12 variances to allow the development. That 13 development was approved. 14 And so, the standards that are here, 15 beginning on page 19, are basically the standards 16 that were required for mid-rise housing, from the 17 P zone, from our Zoning Ordinance, and modified 18 slightly for the development that was proposed. 19 It does not allow any greater development than 20 had already been approved by the Board of 21 Adjustment. So, it’s not as the -- the 22 redevelopment plan can allow that plan to be 23 amended. 24 The main considerations that differ between 25 the zoning and what was approved by the Board  14 1 were the front yard setbacks. And the front 2 yards, in this case, are 8th Street and 10th 3 Street. So, we’ve allowed a zero lot line 4 development, which is actually consistent with 5 the neighborhood. 6 The coverages are the same. 7 The main difference between the zoning and 8 what was approved and what was included in this 9 is the building height. Your mid-rise allows up 10 to a five story in zoning. And what was approved 11 by the Board is six stories, or 70 feet, and that 12 is what the plan includes. It allows a mix of 13 studios, one bedrooms, and two bedrooms. And it 14 requires, in addition to -- it allows a zero lot 15 line on the ground floor, but requires the 16 residential component above the parking to be 17 stepped back from the street. So, there is a 18 little bit more of a setback around the building 19 itself. On the ground level, it goes to the 20 property lines. But up, there’s a little bit 21 more light and air created because the building 22 is required to be set back ten feet from above 23 the second floor. 24 The remainder of the plan is really sort of 25 the boilerplate standards on -- on how it meets  15 1 State and local objectives. It does allow for 2 the plan itself to be amended. It allows for 3 variances to be -- within certain criteria, for 4 variances to be granted. 5 But again, the plan, as proposed, meets 6 what was already approved by the Board of 7 Adjustment. So, what was approved will not be 8 any larger or greater than what is there. 9 So, it’s pretty straightforward, I think. 10 If the Board has any questions, I’ll be happy to 11 answer them. And then, we can open it up to the 12 public and one -- 13 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: I have -- 14 MR. SPATZ: One at a time, they could ask 15 me questions. 16 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Mr. Spatz? 17 MR. SPATZ: Yes. 18 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: The post 19 office is going to stay? 20 MR. SPATZ: The post office -- that 21 building is going to be removed. 22 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Removed. 23 MR. SPATZ: But the requirement is that 24 within the building, there’s -- it allows some 25 commercial on the ground floor.  16 1 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Commercial, so 2 then we have a space. 3 MR. SPATZ: And one of them is the post 4 office. 5 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Good. 6 MR. SPATZ: So, the post office will remain 7 to serve the building, as well as the 8 neighborhood. 9 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Very good. 10 MR. SPATZ: What is there is really -- it’s 11 not your full service post office, it’s really a 12 drop off station. And that will remain as is. 13 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Excellent. 14 MR. SPATZ: So, if there are any other 15 questions -- 16 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Any questions? 17 MR. SPATZ: -- fine. 18 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Any question? 19 MR. SPATZ: If not -- 20 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Alex, any 21 question? 22 MR. SPATZ: I will be happy -- 23 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Anybody in the 24 public? 25 Nobody in the public.  17 1 MR. SPATZ: -- to answer any public 2 questions, if there are any. 3 THE SECRETARY: Ms. Morejon, open to the 4 public. 5 Right? 6 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: To the public. 7 It’s open to the pubic now. 8 THE SECRETARY: Thank you. 9 MS. DILLON: Mr. Price, -- 10 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Mr. Price? 11 MS. DILLON: -- please raise your right 12 hand. 13 Do you affirm the testimony you’re about to 14 give this Board is the whole truth? 15 MR. PRICE: I do. 16 MS. DILLON: Please state your name and 17 address for the record. 18 MR. PRICE: Larry Price, 1006 Palisade 19 Avenue. 20 MS. DILLON: Thank you. 21 MR. PRICE: Okay. 22 Mr. Spatz, a question on page 8. 23 MR. SPATZ: Okay. 24 MR. PRICE: Section 8 on that page says: 25 The limits of the development area shall  18 1 not preclude the voluntary inclusion of lots or 2 portions of lots, adjustments to property 3 boundaries, mergers of lots, or subdivisions of 4 lands that border and abut the redevelopment area 5 into the proposed plans for redevelopment. 6 Okay. 7 MR. SPATZ: That is a -- is a standard 8 clause within redevelopment plans. In this 9 particular case, there is no additional land 10 being included within the plan. But that is a 11 standard clause. That’s why we left it in. The 12 development, as proposed, and as approved, does 13 not include anything beyond the parking lot. 14 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: The parking 15 lot. 16 MR. PRICE: But you’re authorizing that. 17 Correct? 18 MR. SPATZ: It does allow it. I would say 19 to the Board, if the Board has any concerns about 20 that, I would -- you know -- 21 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Yeah. 22 MR. SPATZ: And the concern that it leaves 23 an open, I can take that paragraph out. It’s not 24 critical to this plan. It is just typical 25 redevelopment --  19 1 MR. PRICE: Here -- 2 MR. SPATZ: -- plan language. 3 MR. PRICE: Here is my concern with that. 4 MR. SPATZ: Sure. 5 MR. PRICE: The parking lot is in the P 6 zone. 7 MR. SPATZ: Correct. 8 MR. PRICE: To the west of that is CN zone. 9 MR. SPATZ: Right. 10 MR. PRICE: And all the rest of the space 11 -- 12 MR. SPATZ: Right. 13 MR. PRICE: -- around is R zone. 14 MR. SPATZ: Um hum. 15 MR. PRICE: Okay. 16 And only the parking lot has been -- 17 MR. SPATZ: Um hum. 18 MR. PRICE: -- declared an area -- 19 MR. SPATZ: Correct. 20 MR. PRICE: -- in need of redevelopment. 21 MR. SPATZ: That is correct. Yes. 22 MR. PRICE: So, if you, for example, took 23 something from the adjacent R zone and included 24 it in -- 25 MR. SPATZ: Right.  20 1 MR. PRICE: -- it hasn’t been blessed -- 2 MR. SPATZ: Right. 3 MR. PRICE: -- as being an area in need -- 4 MR. SPATZ: Right. 5 MR. PRICE: -- of redevelopment. 6 MR. SPATZ: Right. 7 MR. PRICE: And on the other hand, the R 8 zone would be limited to, for example, buildings 9 of -- 10 MR. SPATZ: Right. 11 MR. PRICE: -- three stories and 40 feet. 12 MR. SPATZ: Correct. 13 MR. PRICE: Whereas, if you slide it into 14 the -- 15 MR. SPATZ: Right. 16 MR. PRICE: -- redevelopment -- 17 MR. SPATZ: Right. 18 MR. PRICE: -- zone, it suddenly becomes -- 19 MR. SPATZ: Right. 20 MR. PRICE: -- blessed with -- 21 MR. SPATZ: I hear what you’re saying. As 22 I said, it doesn’t -- it will not affect the 23 proposed development and what was approved. I am 24 happy to remove this clause to -- you know, and 25 then, you know, and then, it just --  21 1 So, I have no problem doing that. It’s -- 2 you know, if the Board -- 3 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Why -- why 4 would you want to do -- 5 MR. SPATZ: Well, I mean, there was -- 6 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: We’re just 7 talking -- we’re just talking about the parking 8 lot. 9 MR. SPATZ: Right. 10 But what this would allow is that in a 11 proposed development, if there was a 12 determination that there was another piece of 13 property next to it that might be valuable to 14 take, in order to -- and this is an irregularly 15 shaped property, under traditional redevelopment 16 standards, you could do that. I would say, since 17 there’s already been an approved development for 18 the site, I have no objection if there’s a 19 question that this may be of rights that might 20 cause issues. 21 Eliminating it from the plan doesn’t harm 22 the developer, it doesn’t harm the City, and if 23 it clarifies it, I -- I have no problem taking 24 that out and then -- you know, adjusting the 25 pages.  22 1 So, if the Board would -- recommends 2 removing -- you know, item 8 out of that, I’ll be 3 happy to do that. As I said, it doesn’t change 4 what would be developed. And if it leaves some 5 open ended question -- you know, I -- 6 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Yeah. I would 7 recommend it. 8 MR. SPATZ: I would be fine doing that. 9 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: I would 10 recommend doing it. 11 MR. SPATZ: So -- 12 MS. DILLON: I’m sorry? I didn’t hear you. 13 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: I feel like 14 this should stay the way it is. What you have 15 next to that is a two family house. 16 MR. SPATZ: Right. 17 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: I know the 18 owners. 19 MR. SPATZ: Right. 20 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: I know most of 21 the people in Union City -- 22 MR. SPATZ: Right. 23 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: -- well. 24 Garcia’s in this side. The other people, there’s 25 a two family house here.  23 1 But then, on the other side, what you have? 2 The post office, another two family house. 3 MR. SPATZ: Right. 4 MR. VELAZQUEZ: And a parking lot. 5 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: We’re talking 6 about the parking lot. 7 MR. SPATZ: Right. Right. 8 Yeah, I mean, what -- what this says, it 9 says that the redevelopment area, as so 10 designated, that other properties can be included 11 -- 12 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Could be. 13 Sure. 14 MR. SPATZ: -- even though if they’re not 15 in the original redevelopment area. 16 As I said, it’s -- it’s up to the Board -- 17 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: I won’t limit 18 it to remove this from this proposal, because you 19 never know, Mr. Price, and maybe the people next 20 door wants to sell the property. 21 MR. PRICE: Ah, but that’s -- but that’s 22 the problem. 23 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: And then, 24 you’re holding. 25 MR. PRICE: The problem is that they’re in  24 1 the R zone. And suddenly, they’re going to be 2 included, which has -- is a -- and the R zone is 3 pretty restrictive. And suddenly, they could be 4 included in the -- in the P zone, which really 5 means in the redevelopment zone. 6 MR. SPATZ: Right. I think -- yeah. I 7 mean, I think that what this does is it allows 8 the redevelopment area to be expanded. I don't 9 -- you know, those -- if any properties were to 10 be included, I think that that puts them within 11 the zoning standards of -- of this. 12 So, it -- you know, yes, it’s a greater 13 change from R to P, then it is from P to P 14 standards. You know, as I said, I don't think 15 it’s realistic in this case because there’s 16 already approved development for the property. 17 I -- it’s at the pleasure of the Board. If 18 you want me to leave it in, I’ll leave it in. If 19 you think that you’re okay with having it removed 20 -- 21 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: How everybody 22 feel? 23 MR. SPATZ: -- it’s -- it’s -- 24 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Can you 25 please?  25 1 MR. SPATZ: You know, as I said, it does 2 not change the plan and it does not change what 3 was already approved for the property. 4 If the Board is not concerned that that 5 creates an issue, totally at the pleasure of the 6 Board. So -- 7 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: I feel 8 comfortable with this. 9 MR. SPATZ: Okay. 10 All right. Then, we won’t make the change, 11 and theoretically, the Board of Commissioners 12 might be able to make that change. 13 MR. PRICE: Well -- 14 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: It’s going to 15 be, Mr. Price, it’s an empty lot. It’s been a 16 parking lot for many years; that I think I’m been 17 in Union City many years, it’s going to be -- 18 whoever goes through this is going to be a 19 beautiful building, is going to be an improvement 20 for the City, is going to be senior low income, 21 whatever it is, is going to help the community. 22 MR. PRICE: That’s not how the issue here. 23 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Is -- I know 24 what -- 25 MR. PRICE: The issue is --  26 1 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: -- the issue 2 is. 3 MR. PRICE: -- the parking lot has been 4 designated by the -- by Resolution by the 5 governing body as being an area in need of 6 redevelopment. Okay. You have a two family 7 house next door, or whatever, whatever it may be. 8 What this says is you can include that two 9 family house in the -- 10 And since this thing will last for 40 11 years, it’s not just what you could do, now you 12 could, theoretically, do it in 20 years or 30 13 years, you could add that. That -- and a change 14 in zone boundaries is -- is, I think Mr. Spatz 15 would agree, is a big deal. 16 MR. SPATZ: Well, it wouldn’t be a change 17 in zone boundaries because the zoning -- the 18 underlying zoning wouldn’t change. It would 19 still –- 20 Let’s just say we use that two family 21 house. It would stay in the R zone. It would 22 just be included within the redevelopment area, 23 and therefore, now come under the jurisdiction of 24 the redevelopment. So, the underlying -- 25 So, even if they did that and never  27 1 developed it, the two family house would be able 2 to remain. Somebody could develop it as a two 3 family house, if they were to tear it down and 4 build a three family house, let’s just say. 5 So, it doesn’t take away any rights of that 6 property. It doesn’t -- you know, again, I think 7 it’s more standard language in redevelopment 8 plans that if when they go out to actually 9 develop the property, they find that a piece of 10 property is needed for drainage or the 11 circulation aisle needs to be a little bit 12 bigger, they can add property to the 13 redevelopment area for those purposes -- you 14 know, and do the development. 15 You know, as I said, it’s really the 16 pleasure of the Board. I mean, if you have -- 17 MR. PRICE: Okay. 18 MR. SPATZ: I understand your concern. I 19 understand the Board’s response. You know, let’s 20 keep going. 21 MR. PRICE: Okay. Excuse me. 22 Section 9 there -- I mean, it goes on quite 23 a lot, but isn’t Section 9 essentially saying, 24 the Board -- the Planning Board can grant C-1 and 25 C-2 variances?  28 1 MR. SPATZ: Right. 2 It doesn’t give them any greater right than 3 -- it just -- again, it’s just something that has 4 to be included in a redevelopment plan, just to 5 explain that -- that Boards can grant variances 6 from it. They are obviously not permitted to 7 grant D variances, for height or density or 8 anything. 9 So you know, yes, it restates what their 10 powers are -- 11 MR. PRICE: Okay. 12 MR. SPATZ: -- anyway. But I think it’s 13 something that is typically included because 14 theoretically, a redevelopment plan could be 15 developed that does not permit variances to be 16 granted. 17 MR. PRICE: Okay. 18 MR. SPATZ: So, this one does. 19 MR. PRICE: Okay. 20 MR. SPATZ: You know, if we -- 21 MR. PRICE: Okay. Okay. 22 Page 18, item i, it says: 23 Sidewalks around the structures and parking 24 area shall be provided for safe and convenient 25 access to and around the site.  29 1 MR. SPATZ: Um hum. 2 MR. PRICE: Sidewalks must be properly 3 sized and so forth -- 4 MR. SPATZ: Um hum. 5 MR. PRICE: -- and so on. 6 Okay. We’re going to have a building in 7 the middle. Side yards -- there are no front 8 yard setbacks either on 10th Street or 8th Street 9 -- 10 MR. SPATZ: Right. 11 MR. PRICE: -- required. 12 MR. SPATZ: Right. 13 MR. PRICE: There are side yard setbacks 14 required, four feet on each side. 15 MR. SPATZ: Right. 16 MR. PRICE: Eight feet combined. That’s 17 the only place to put a sidewalk. 18 MR. SPATZ: This -- 19 MR. PRICE: But -- 20 MR. SPATZ: This again is more boilerplate 21 language, just indicating that where sidewalks 22 are appropriate, they have to put sidewalks. And 23 it’s really just the two street frontages. 24 MR. PRICE: Well -- 25 MR. SPATZ: It’s not requiring sidewalks to  30 1 go through the property from -- so you can go 2 between 8th and -- and 10th. 3 MR. PRICE: Thanks to my legal education in 4 the last -- 5 MR. SPATZ: Right. 6 MR. PRICE: -- 12 years -- 7 MR. SPATZ: Right. 8 MR. PRICE: -- I’ll -- I’ll defer. 9 When it says sidewalks shall be provided, 10 that has a mandatory element. So sidewalks -- 11 MR. SPATZ: It’s -- 12 MR. PRICE: Sidewalks around the -- 13 MR. SPATZ: It’s access -- 14 MR. PRICE: -- structures -- 15 MR. SPATZ: I -- 16 MR. PRICE: -- shall be provided. 17 MR. SPATZ: I don't -- I don't read it that 18 way. 19 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: No. 20 MR. SPATZ: You know, I understand -- 21 again, I understand what you’re saying. I don't 22 -- I’m not as literal about it as -- as you are 23 being, to and around the site. 24 Again, if the Board -- you know, it could 25 certainly be for convenient access to the site,  31 1 near the site, on the street frontages. 2 Again, I’m happy to make, again, that 3 change just to -- if that is -- 4 MR. PRICE: Well -- 5 MR. SPATZ: If that is a concern, I 6 understand what you’re -- 7 MR. PRICE: You might -- 8 MR. SPATZ: -- what the Board is saying. 9 No. I’m saying. 10 No, I wasn’t asking you to -- to modify it. 11 If the Board wants me to change that to clarify 12 that it doesn’t actually mean around the 13 building, around the site is -- you know -- 14 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: But you have a 15 sidewalk through 10th Street. You have a sidewalk 16 through 8th Street. 17 MR. SPATZ: Right. I think -- 18 MR. PRICE: No. 19 MR. SPATZ: -- Mr. Price is concerned -- 20 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: You want -- 21 MR. SPATZ: -- that this is going to allow 22 -- 23 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Do you want -- 24 MR. SPATZ: -- is -- that this -- 25 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: -- him -- Mr.  32 1 Spatz to specify that? What do -- 2 MR. PRICE: No. This says sidewalks around 3 the structures -- 4 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: The building? 5 No. 6 MR. PRICE: -- shall be provided. 7 MR. SPATZ: Right. 8 MR. PRICE: We have two, four foot wide -- 9 MR. SPATZ: Right. 10 MR. PRICE: -- side yard setbacks. And 11 what that said, I don't –- 12 Are there any access to those side yard -- 13 MR. SPATZ: There -- 14 MR. PRICE: There’s no access. 15 MR. SPATZ: There isn’t. It -- 16 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: No. 17 MR. PRICE: There’s -- 18 MR. SPATZ: Again, it’s -- it’s a very 19 literal reading of what it says. I can clear it 20 up just a little bit -- 21 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Okay. 22 MR. SPATZ: -- so that it doesn’t create 23 any sort of a problem, if that’s -- 24 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: If we approve 25 it tonight --  33 1 MR. SPATZ: -- if that’s up to the Board. 2 I -- 3 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: -- it could be 4 subject to that. 5 MR. SPATZ: Right. I -- that -- if that’s 6 -- if the Board does go to approve this and makes 7 that recommendation -- 8 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: We make that. 9 MR. SPATZ: -- I will make that change and 10 the copy -- 11 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: That would be 12 a good recommendation. 13 Right, Alex? 14 MR. SPATZ: -- in the copy that goes to the 15 Board of Commissioners. 16 So, that’s fine. 17 MR. PRICE: Well, I’ll -- I’ll ask counsel 18 here. 19 If you had the wording, sidewalks around 20 the structures shall be provided. 21 Shall has a mandatory aspect in that -- in 22 that context. 23 Correct? 24 MS. MIAWAD: The word shall does have a 25 mandatory connotation, but it doesn’t necessarily  34 1 mean that they’re obligated to -- to do it. 2 So, it gives them -- it gives them 3 permission to do it, should they need to do it. 4 MR. PRICE: That -- that would be they may 5 do that. But when it says shall, because of the 6 mandatory nature of the -- of the word, they have 7 to provide for side yard setback, nobody will use 8 that sidewalk. 9 MR. SPATZ: Yeah. 10 MS. MIAWAD: I personally don’t -- 11 MR. SPATZ: Yeah. Again -- 12 MS. MIAWAD: -- read it in -- 13 MR. SPATZ: -- to not -- 14 MS. MIAWAD: -- that statutory language. 15 MR. SPATZ: You know, extend the meeting 16 any longer than it needs to be, I’m happy to make 17 that change just to clarify it, so -- 18 MR. PRICE: Okay. 19 MR. SPATZ: So, I’ll do that. 20 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Okay. 21 MR. PRICE: You’ll do that. 22 MR. SPATZ: It’s -- yes. Exactly. 23 Exactly. 24 MR. PRICE: Okay. Okay. 25 Just to clar -- on page 20, I guess it  35 1 would be item 2c at the very top. 2 MR. SPATZ: Twenty, okay. 3 MR. PRICE: All buildings shall be stepped 4 back on the site lot lines minimum of ten feet 5 above the second floor. 6 MR. SPATZ: Right. 7 MR. PRICE: So, working from the sides, we 8 have a four foot side yard setback. 9 MR. SPATZ: Right. 10 MR. PRICE: Then we go up two floors, which 11 are the parking floors. 12 MR. SPATZ: Right. Right. 13 MR. PRICE: And then, on both sides -- 14 MR. SPATZ: Yes. 15 MR. PRICE: -- we are required -- 16 MR. SPATZ: That's correct. A step -- 17 MR. PRICE: Ten feet -- 18 MR. SPATZ: A further step back. That's 19 correct. 20 So, it’s four -- it would be 14 feet from 21 the side property line. 22 MR. PRICE: Four -- 14 feet from -- 23 MR. SPATZ: Correct. 24 MR. PRICE: On both sides. 25 MR. SPATZ: That's correct. That’s --  36 1 MR. PRICE: Okay. 2 MR. SPATZ: -- what it requires. 3 MR. PRICE: Okay. Okay. 4 Page 22, the second paragraph there, should 5 any permanent structure, such as ramps, steps or 6 canopies be proposed within the right-of-way. 7 MR. SPATZ: Um hum. 8 MR. PRICE: The parking lot isn’t really a 9 right-of-way, is it? 10 MR. SPATZ: No. 11 MR. PRICE: No. There is no right-of-way 12 here, is it? 13 MR. SPATZ: It would -- it would be if 14 ramps, steps or canopies, as part of the 15 building, if they would have to project beyond 16 the property line on 8th and 10th, similar to we 17 have bay windows –- 18 MR. PRICE: Oh. 19 MR. SPATZ: -- in places and such, they 20 need to go to the governing body to get sort of 21 that air rights approval. 22 MR. PRICE: Okay. 23 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Um hum. 24 MR. SPATZ: Just like we have everywhere 25 else in the City.  37 1 MR. PRICE: Very good. 2 MR. VELAZQUEZ: Just like what they did at 3 the Bella Vista. 4 MR. SPATZ: That's correct. 5 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Um hum. 6 MR. SPATZ: Right. Right. 7 Then we have, sometimes, where the building 8 is to the property line, they have a bay window, 9 they had to go to the Board of Commissioners and 10 get approval to allow the bay window to 11 technically extend beyond the property line into 12 the City’s right-of-way. 13 MR. PRICE: Okay. Okay. 14 Page 24. 15 MR. SPATZ: Um hum. 16 MR. PRICE: Two questions. 17 MR. SPATZ: Okay. 18 MR. PRICE: Well, actually, the first at 19 the top. The top paragraph said: 20 The redevelopment area is not contiguous to 21 any adjoining municipalities, but is proximate to 22 the City of Jersey City with the closest point 23 being the intersections of Summit Avenue and 24 Paterson Plank Road. 25 MR. SPATZ: Um hum.  38 1 MR. PRICE: That is not true because south 2 of Paterson Plank Road, to 5th Street, is still 3 Union City. So, the closest point in Jersey City 4 is Summit Avenue and -- 5 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Fifth. 6 MR. PRICE: -- 5th Street. 7 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Fifth Street. 8 Summit and 5th. 9 MR. PRICE: Not Paterson Plank -- 10 MR. SPATZ: Okay. 11 MR. PRICE: -- Road. 12 MR. SPATZ: I’ll -- 13 MR. PRICE: The dividing line between -- 14 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Summit and 15 5th. 16 MR. SPATZ: I -- I will change that to 5th 17 Street -- 18 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Right. 19 MR. SPATZ: -- when we make the 20 adjustments. 21 MR. PRICE: Fifth Street. 22 MR. SPATZ: That’s fine. 23 MR. PRICE: Dividing line between the -- 24 MR. SPATZ: Okay. 25 MR. PRICE: -- two cities --  39 1 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Another 2 recommendation. 3 MR. PRICE: -- is not Paterson Plank. 4 MR. SPATZ: Not a problem. 5 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: That’s right. 6 Summit and 5th. 7 MR. SPATZ: That’s fine. 8 MR. PRICE: Okay. 9 The second question I have is at the 10 bottom. 11 MR. SPATZ: Um hum. 12 MR. PRICE: No variance from the 13 requirements herein shall be cognizable by the 14 Zoning Board of Adjustment. 15 MR. SPATZ: Right. 16 MR. PRICE: Is that another way of saying, 17 no D variances. 18 MR. SPATZ: That's correct. You can’t go 19 to the Board -- the Planning Board is the Board 20 that has the approval, site plan and variance 21 approval. And no D variances can be granted. 22 MR. PRICE: Okay. 23 MR. SPATZ: Correct. 24 MR. PRICE: And the -- and it does not 25 expand the powers of the Planning Board.  40 1 MR. SPATZ: That's correct. 2 MR. PRICE: They grant -- 3 MR. SPATZ: That’s right. 4 MR. PRICE: -- C-1 and C-2 variances. 5 MR. SPATZ: As was in the other -- I would 6 say as part of this development process, the 7 development would probably have to come back 8 before this Board for actual site plan approval, 9 I believe. 10 But I’ll leave that up to the attorneys to 11 decide that. 12 MR. PRICE: Very good. 13 Thank you very much, Mr. Spatz. 14 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Thank you, Mr. 15 Price. 16 MR. SPATZ: Okay. 17 Thanks. 18 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Okay. 19 Any questions from the Board? 20 Alex? 21 MR. VELAZQUEZ: Any questions? 22 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: So, I’m going 23 to make a motion to approve this with the 24 recommendations. 25 THE SECRETARY: I have a motion on the  41 1 table to approve the recommendation -- 2 MR. VELAZQUEZ: I second. 3 THE SECRETARY: -- to approve -- 4 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Which will be 5 on page 24. 6 THE SECRETARY: -- by Ms. Morejon. 7 MR. VELAZQUEZ: Second. 8 THE SECRETARY: Seconded by Mr. Velazquez. 9 Motion on the table to approve, as amended. 10 MR. SPATZ: Right. Those couple of 11 changes. Right. 12 THE SECRETARY: By Alicia Morejon. 13 MR. SPATZ: Those couple of changes. 14 THE SECRETARY: Seconded by Mr. Velazquez. 15 Roll call on the motion. 16 Ms. Genao? 17 MS. GENAO: Yes. 18 THE SECRETARY: Ms. Fernandez? 19 MS. FERNANDEZ: Yes. 20 THE SECRETARY: Ms. Morejon? 21 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Yes. 22 THE SECRETARY: Mr. Rivero? 23 MR. RIVERO: Yes. 24 THE SECRETARY: Mr. Velazquez? 25 MR. VELAZQUEZ: Yes.  42 1 THE SECRETARY: Mr. Guareno? 2 MR. GUARENO: Yes. 3 THE SECRETARY: Six in favor. 4 Motion pass. 5 Thank you. 6 * * * 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25  43 1 ADJOURNMENT: 2 3 THE SECRETARY: There being no other 4 application or hearing on tonight’s agenda, can I 5 have a motion to close tonight’s meeting? 6 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Motion. 7 THE SECRETARY: Motion by Ms. Morejon. 8 MR. VELAZQUEZ: Second. 9 THE SECRETARY: Seconded by Mr. Velazquez. 10 Roll call on the motion. 11 MR. VELAZQUEZ: All in favor? 12 THE SECRETARY: Ms. Genao? 13 MS. GENAO: Yes. 14 THE SECRETARY: Ms. Fernandez? 15 MS. FERNANDEZ: Yes. 16 THE SECRETARY: Mr. Rivero? 17 MR. RIVERO: Yes. 18 THE SECRETARY: Ms. Morejon? 19 ACTING CHAIRPERSON MOREJON: Yes. 20 THE SECRETARY: Mr. Velazquez? 21 MR. VELAZQUEZ: Yes. 22 THE SECRETARY: Mr. Guareno? 23 MR. GUARENO: Yes. 24 THE SECRETARY: Six in favor. 25 Motion pass.  44 1 Thank you. 2 Let the record show that the meeting has 3 ended. 4 Thank you and good night, everyone. 5 6 (Whereupon, the proceedings were concluded 7 at 6:37 p.m.) 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25  45 1 STATE OF NEW JERSEY : 2 : 3 COUNTY OF ESSEX : 4 5 6 I, DEBRA A. KASZNIAK, assigned transcriber, 7 do hereby affirm that the foregoing is a true and 8 accurate transcript in the matter of the SPECIAL 9 MEETING of the UNION CITY PLANNING BOARD heard on 10 Tuesday, February 19, 2019 and digitally 11 recorded. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Monitored and proofread by: Deborah Dillon