Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Washington Building Application topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pompton Lakes planning board hears Washington Building plan to add eight apartments; engineers say structure can support addition
Summary
Applicant for the Washington Building presented soil and structural reports and designs for converting the second floor to eight apartments; the board requested revised engineering drawings, ADA/storefront details and brick/color samples and set an expected return for further review.
The Pompton Lakes planning board heard a formal application from Washington Urban Renewal at Pompton Lakes LLC to convert the Washington Building's second floor from office space to eight apartments and to renovate ground-floor retail.
Attorney Steven Beltre told the board the applicant submitted a soil investigation (dated 09/05/2024) and structural plans (dated 09/10/2024). Beltre said the team "believes that we have shown that we have structural integrity, that the foundation, the soils, and the First Floor will support the Second Floor addition." Both a geotechnical report and a sealed structural plan were entered into the record and the board accepted the applicant's structural engineer, Sanjay Patel of SEWA Engineering, as an expert witness.
Architect Johnny Antilles and owner Joseph Santoro described the design: eight residential units (one one-bedroom and seven two-bedroom units), about 9,454 square feet of building area, 22 off-street parking spaces and continued ground-floor commercial space. The board and applicant discussed parking math: the review materials show the site's existing deficit would shrink from a 57-space deficit to a 42-space deficit after the proposed change, with an estimated need of 64 spaces for the proposed uses. The applicant noted four on-street spaces adjacent to the building and said they had revised parking calculations in a May 1 review.
Board members pressed for design clarifications and code compliance: whether retail restrooms would be made ADA-compliant, whether laundry would be in-unit or a shared facility (applicants confirmed in-unit laundry in updated plans), setback/variance implications if a second floor is rebuilt, and whether rooftop mechanicals would be visible from the street (applicant said parapet height would screen equipment). The board asked the applicant to show recessed storefront-door details, to provide physical brick/color samples and to correct apartment square footage where it fell below current code minima.
On stormwater, the applicant said drainage currently flows to existing catch basins under adjacent streets; the civil engineer will prepare a planning-board-level drainage design and consider underground storage if required. A board member asked the applicant to consider a "green roof" as an option; engineers replied that an intensive green roof was unlikely to be feasible for the building's size but that stormwater capture alternatives would be evaluated.
The board asked the applicant to return with revised engineering drawings (not renderings) and materials samples as soon as possible and discussed scheduling a follow-up by the November 7 meeting.
No public commenters addressed the board on the application at this session.
