The Jersey City Planning Board spent hours hearing testimony for an eight-story, 14-unit proposal at 152 Ogden Ave. at last night’s meeting, their first public session held in person since the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic.
By Daniel Ulloa/Hudson County View
The project was carried at their November meeting and the governing body did not hold a meeting in December.
Project architect Anthony Vandermark explained thy want to build eight stories, or approximately 85 feet, complete with a green roof, deck, 14-spot parking garage. He also mentioned the initial proposal was larged and they have since scaled it down.
“How are the parking spaces assigned?” Board Chair Christopher Langston asked.
“One per unit,” Vandermark clarified.
Attorney Cynthia Hadjiyannis, once again representing the Riverview Neighborhood Association (RNA), questioned the safety of building anywhere on the palisades in the Heights neighborhood.
She questioned project civil engineer Brian Liebeskind extensively on how their driveway would be safe, which he continually insisted would not be dangerous, as well as geotechnical engineer Nejm Jundi about the rocky surface on the cliffs.
“Every rock will have fractures. But that doesn’t mean the rock isn’t stable,” Jundi replied.
“What do the fractures mean then?” Hadjiyannis asked.
Jundi explained that the top of rocks are often fractured, while below the soil surface they are not.
“It won’t be affecting the overall stability of the rock mass,” he added.
Hadjiyannis asked if they found fractures, to which Jundi said they did and that they were minor in nature.
“Do you know whether they’re continuous fractures?” Hadjiyannis asked.
“They’re not,” Jundi answered.
“Do fractures make the rock more susceptible to a landslide?” Hadjiyannis asked.
“They do. That’s why you calculate the factor of safety,” Jundi explained, later stating that the proposed weight of the building is well within the limits of the site’s capacity.
Hadjiyannis brought up engineer Geoffrey Goll as an expert witness who sought to present their observations of the site plan, which drew an objection from project attorney Chuck Harrington.
“I have not seen these documents. Mr. Harrington has not seen them. I don’t know that the board wants to entertain this,” interjected Board Counsel Santo Alampi.
Hadjiyannis argued that objectors don’t have to submit exhibits in advance.
“We were here in November,” Harrington pleaded.
“We received an engineering memo this afternoon,” Hadjiyannis replied.
Alampi said the memo was from the city, not the applicant, and eventually Harrington said he had no objection.
“Are you comfortable with those numbers? I want your engineering team to look at the numbers,” Langston noted.
“If we’re not comfortable proceeding… then the board is absolutely in its purview to carry the application,” Alampi explained.
Commissioner Joey Torres was unhappy the board could not review Hadjiyannis’ presentation previously and also expressed that the project could be carried since the city’s engineering report was not available to be reviewed prior to the meeting.
“I am not going to strenuously object to this,” Harrington said.
Alampi noted project materials have to be posted 10 days before the hearings, though Hadjiyannis said that rule only applies to the applicant.
“It’s upsetting. It should have been produced beforehand. You could have sent a letter two days ago. I don’t know that the board is comfortable moving forward,” Alampi declared.
Ultimately, Torres said if Harrington had a right to rebuttal, he would be okay with them proceeding.
Goll displayed the definition of stormwater issues from the city, which Langston said is not the current version of the plan.
Alampi also questioned the fact that the applicant’s design plan had been colored and highlighted.
“It is what it is. My expert can counter-testify. We disagree with numbers. We disagree to his opinion,” Harrington stated.
Goll was very concerned about stormwater adversely affecting the site.
“There have been documented landslides in the area,” he declared.
“Ms. Hadjiyannis has other witnesses. I don’t want to get into a back-and-forth. Is there your only expert witness?” Alampi asked.
“We just have fact witnesses who should be pretty quick,” Hadjiyannis responded.
She then called RNA Development Committee Chair Kern Weissman as a fact witness and introduced new exhibits, including a slideshow of observations.
Weissman criticized their traffic report, which is based on a 12-unit building versus a 14-unit building. He explained there was an elevated rail by the site while describing a picture from 1914. Weissman then showed another picture featuring a road collapse.
“Collapses like this can happen. This was a Jersey City road … that suffered a collapse. We wanted to make sure there were no buildings by the cliff,” he stated, further stating that the collapse was about 1,000 feet from the building site.
RNA board member Roger Heitmann said he lives about 50 feet from the location and recalled a serious incident occurred there decades ago: in the 1980s, a sinkhole near the site collapsed due to a storm and was never fixed after being closed off.
“This is why we oppose the construction. The proposed building is out of scale with the neighborhood. The proposed building will block light, view, and air corridors.”
Langston only wanted one member of the RNA to speak for the group as a whole during the public comment period.
Another Heights resident, Caroline Katz, was concerned about a collapse and developers destroying older, more affordable homes.
Kate Donnelly wanted to testify, but she is a member of the RNA and also served on the zoning board, though she clarified that she recently resigned.
Langston said that since she voted on this matter and was on RNA, she could not weigh in.
Dan Blidner also said he lives near the site and felt it was not in line with the existing buildings in the neighborhood.
“We don’t feel this development is in keeping with the community. This project does not seem to be a safe one,” he asserted.
“This plan is not compatible with the neighborhood. Why should this building be the only 8-story building on Ogden Ave.?” asked Jeffrey Budney.
Courtney Walker was concerned the building would be out of place and said the nearby traffic intersection is already busy.
“Ogden is a rather narrow road. This is going to push a lot of traffic onto Palisade [Ave]. I would like the council to deny the application,” she said.
A short time later, Langston announced that the hearing would end at 10:30 p.m after dominating the meeting, which began at 5:30 p.m. at the City Hall Annex.
“I don’t see a decision being made tonight,” he noted.
As a result, the planning Board unanimously voted to carry the measure (5-0).
