By JOHN T. WARD

Adding yet another twist to what’s already the most convoluted building request in recent Red Bank history, the borough zoning board ruled Thursday night that a proposed 72-room hotel on the Navesink River exceeds height limitations.

In a trial-like case that turned on questions of property frontage and where streets begin and end, the board rejected the contention by Hampton Hotel developer RBank Capital LLC that the hotel site fronts on Route 35, rather than Rector Place, and should be subject to a height limit of 85 feet above mean high tide, rather than 60 feet.

The board’s 6-1 rejection of those arguments appear to mean that Rbank will have to either shear off several floors of the six-story structure or start its application all over again, abandoning a series of hearings now on hold at the planning board.

The zoning board was not ruling on the overall merits of the hotel plan, which had been the subject of planning board hearings that began last September.

Rather, the zoning board convened solely for the purpose of hearing an “interpretation” challenge by objector Stephen Mitchell, who contended that the height of the proposed structure, at 82.2 feet above mean high tide of the adjoining, put it in violation of limits for the waterfront development zone in which it would be built.

That, in turn, meant that the case should have been heard all along by the zoning board, which has different and arguably stiffer standards, Mitchell contended.

Lawyer Marty McGann and engineers for Rbank argued that though the former Exxon property has 47 feet of its southern border on Rector Place, it should more properly be seen as fronting on Route 35, and that a different height standard should thus apply.

The board, with little discussion and some apparent uncertainty, agreed with Mitchell.

Only board member Karen Waldman took Rbank’s side.

“Yes, I agree it’s on Rector Place,” she told redbankgreen afterward. “But I don’t think it ought to be treated like the rest of Rector Place,” which is lined with residences. “I think it’s separate and distinctive.”

Here’s Mitchell’s comment on the outcome, via email:

I never had an issue with developing the site with a hotel. My problem with the Hampton Inn plan was that it was too tall, too big, and too intense of a development for the 1 acre site. Tonight’s Zoning Board interpretation only bolsters my opinion. Now, let’s see if the Hampton Inn comes back with a more responsible and conforming design.

By JOHN T. WARD

The developers of proposed 72-room Hampton Inn in Red Bank insist the property on which the hotel would be built is not on Rector Place.

Problem: they previously agreed that it was.

Easily the most multifaceted and complex case to confront  borough land use officials in years, the hotel, which would be built on the site of a closed Exxon station at the foot of the Cooper Bridge, has spawned three lawsuits and long-running, simultaneous sets of hearings at the planning and zoning boards.

At issue at the zoning board is a challenge by borough resident Stephen Mitchell, backed by a competing hotel group, who has asked that the board determine whether the main case was mistakenly sent by officials to the planning board. By his reckoning, the proposed six-story hotel violates the height limits of the waterfront development zone, and thus needs variances from the zoning board.

Mitchell’s challenge has led to three sessions resembling a trial, with lawyers for the opposing sides frequently clashing over rules of evidence and the relevance of questions in cross-examination.

On Thursday night, the thing got even more bizarre, as a witness for the hotel testified its property is not in any way on Rector Place.

Though borough tax records, the post office and a flurry of legislative activity over the property in 2009 all identify the site as 80 Rector Place, an engineer for developer Rbank Capital LLC insisted Thursday night that not only does the site “front” on Route 35, but that it has no frontage whatsoever on Rector Place.

His proof: agreements between the borough and the state Department of Transportation, as well as a finely detailed roadway jurisdiction map. All, he said, show that a 40-foot stretch of the property long identified as being on Rector actually fronts on Route 35.

Exiting the property from that area would put a pedestrian smack on state property, not Rector Place, which is a Monmouth County road, says hotel lawyer Marty McGann.

The issue is key, McGann said, in  determining how to apply a measurement formula in a zoning ordinance to gauge whether the proposed hotel is too tall.

To prevail, though, McGann will have to overcome a wealth of contradictory evidence, including borough tax and other designations.

He’ll also have to reverse the stance taken by of his own client three years ago.

That’s when Rbank Capital sought, and obtained, a decision from the borough council that, despite its street address, the property had previously been included by mistake on a list of residential properties along Rector Place in an ordinance that aimed to preserve old homes. At no time, however, did Rbank representatives claim that the property had no Rector Street frontage.

McGann said the existence of the documents cited Thursday night was unknown at the time.

But Mitchell’s lawyer, Ron Gasiorowski, made clear he regards the frontage issue as a red herring. The ordinance, he maintains, makes no reference to frontage in its formula for determining where to measure a building’s height. Instead, he said, it requires a line be drawn between the river and “the nearest parallel roadway,” which he says is Rector Place.

And just as McGann maintains that the post office designation “is based on public convenience” and has nothing to do with zoning, Gasiorowski claims the highway jurisdiction agreements have nothing to do with zoning, either.

The hearing was tentatively scheduled to resume May 17.

Matt DePonti of Powerhouse Signworks gets the word about Wedding Walk out above Broad Street last week. (Click to enlarge)

Here come the brides-to-be again, as Red Bank merchants reprise an idea that’s turned into one of the more popular recurring draws of shoppers and diners.

As with the first three editions of this shopping extravaganza, merchants of everything from formalwear to framing, from rehearsal-dinner restaurant meals to riverfront hotel suites will open their doors on Saturday to an expected swarm of soon-to-be-marrieds hoping to nail down details of their big day.

Organized by downtown promotion agency Red Bank RiverCenter, the free, one-day event is designed for prospective brides, grooms, their families and friends to come to town to plan their weddings, checking out more than 40 wedding-related businesses have to offer.

Florists, gown and tuxedo retailers, photographers, jewelers, hair and nail salons and banquet facilities are on board, RiverCenter says in an announcement. Most will be offering promotions, light refreshments, and libations and live music will be performed all day at three locations throughout town.

From RiverCenter:

The day begins at 9:00 AM with Registration/Check In and Continental Breakfast at the historic Molly Pitcher Inn, at 88 Riverside Avenue followed by a self-guided tour of the town’s participating businesses.  All registrants will receive a Wedding Walk map/passport and each registered couple will receive one complimentary tote bag to hold all the giveaways and information.

Free shuttle, limo and trolley service will also be available with stops at each of the downtown’s shopping areas. Guests must visit at least 16 businesses (including one from each zone) to be eligible for the prize drawings at the end of the day.

The day concludes with a fabulous champagne reception including hors d’oeuvres at the Oyster Point Hotel, a beautiful, waterfront, wedding venue at 146 Bodman Place at 3:00 PM.  The prize raffle will be held at 3:15 PM where guests can enter to win fabulous prizes with their validated passport including the Grand Prize of a 6-day vacation in Costa Rica!  The Wedding Walk will conclude at 4:00 PM.

Guests are strongly encouraged to pre-register @ www.OnlyOneRedBankWedding.com where they can browse the participating businesses and map out their itinerary to get the most out of their day.  Engaged couples, mark your calendars for the Red Bank Wedding Walk on Saturday March 24th! Your dream wedding awaits!

For more information go to www.OnlyOneRedBankWedding.com or call Red Bank RiverCenter at 732-842-4244.  Red Bank RiverCenter is a not-for-profit alliance of businesses, property owners, and residents working toward the economic vitality of the Red Bank Business District.  Please visit www.redbankrivercenter.org for additional information.

By JOHN T. WARD

An opponent of a planned hotel at the foot of the Route 35 Cooper’s Bridge made his fullest case yet Thursday night that the building violates Red Bank’s height limits.

But after two slow-moving, trial-like hearings before the town zoning board, the lawyer for the hotel has barely begun to put on his defense, and no resolution of the dispute is likely for at least another month.

James Freeman, an engineering consultant and witness for objector Stephen Mitchell, identifies the proposed hotel site on an aerial photo. (Click to enlarge)

In one of the more bizarre building requests to confront town officials in recent years, Rbank Capital LLC’s plan for a six-story, 72-room Hampton Inn hotel is the subject of two simultaneous hearings, both involving the same opposing lawyers and battalions of engineers and land-use experts.

The first, underway at the planning board since August, concerns whether the hotel can be built as described.

The other, at the zoning board, is solely about the interpretation of the height restriction in the waterfront development zone in which the hotel property lies, and ultimately, whether the planning board is in fact the proper venue for the plan.

The matter is critical because zoning boards are generally believed by land use experts to present tougher hurdles for applicants.

Stephen Mitchell, of Prospect Avenue, maintains that the hotel violates the zone’s height limit, defined as 50 feet above the nearby Navesink River at a point on a line drawn between the river and the nearest street parallel to the river.

Through his lawyer, Ron Gasiorowski, Mitchell also contends that because of an error by borough Engineer Christine Ballard, of T&M Associates, in applying the ordinance a year ago, the case was improperly sent to the planning board.

With his fees being paid by a previously undisclosed hotel-owning group out of Tinton Falls, Gasiorowski called two witnesses Thursday night – engineer James Freeman and planner Gordon Gemma – who testified that while the ordinance is vague on some of its terms, the Hampton Inn, at 82.25 feet above the nearby Navesink River, exceeds the height limitation by more than 32 feet.

Gemma said he examined the town’s 1995 master plan, as well as a waterfront “vision plan” that preceded it, for guidance on  the intent of the ordinance.

Clearly, he told the board, “the purpose of what you wanted to do was to make sure that there weren’t big buildings that close to the river. The whole point is to have a step-back from the river” to enable passersby to enjoy the sight of the river.

Noting that a corner of the proposed hotel is bisected by a line drawn between Rector Place – one of only four streets named in defining the landward edge of the zone – and the rive, Gemma testified: “That portion of the building that is above 50 feet doesn’t belong there.”

Hampton Inn lawyer Marty McGann, whose verbal clashes with Gasiorowski have previously been a hallmark of the planning board hearings and have continued here, drew a loud objection from his adversary when he suggested that Freeman had “willy-nilly, without any basis or semblance of authority,” chosen where to measure the height of the hotel.

Gemma has already been tripped up on his testimony twice: once, by Ballard, after he said that in the ordinance, “height” and “elevation” are synonymous, and later by McGann, who challenged Gemma’s assertion that he had attended all of the planning board hearings on the matter. Pressed under cross-examination, Gemma acknowledged that his may have missed “one or two” of the hearings.

The zoning board hearing was scheduled to continue April 19.

By JOHN T. WARD

After months of secrecy, the lawyer for the most vocal opponent of a proposed Hampton Inn in Red Bank has identified the moneybags paying for his services.

They’re the operators of the DoubleTree by Hilton Hotel on Hope Road in Tinton Falls.

Attorney Ron Gasiorowski ended his cat-and-mouse game over Stephen Mitchell’s backing Thursday night, when he told the borough zoning board that brothers Carey and Doran Tejfal of Tinton Falls Realty Lodging were picking up the tab for his services.

Gasiorowski, who has filed two pending lawsuits against borough boards over the hotel plan and appeared at numerous hearings on Mitchell’s behalf, had previously declined to tell the borough planning board who was paying his fees, citing attorney-client privilege.

But Gasiorowski dropped that objection at a zoning board hearing Thursday night convened specifically to weigh Mitchell’s claim that town officials erred in ruling last year that the planned hotel did not need a height variance.

Though the planning board has been hearing the hotel application since August, the height issue was kicked over to the zoning board in January because only that board can make that determination under the law, said zoning board attorney Kevin Kennedy.

Gasiorowski said he was disclosing the Tejfals’ names because he agreed with Kennedy, who maintained that without the disclosure, there would be a question of whether Mitchell, now in the position of an applicant, would be compliant with a borough ordinance requiring applicants to identify their principals. The law is aimed at having board members recuse themselves for potential conflicts of interest, and Kennedy said they could not comply if they did not know who was paying Mitchell’s fare.

The law is also aimed at identifying “out-of-town competitors” as objectors, because they “would not have standing to be objectors” under the law to bring challenges of the kind Mitchell filed, Kennedy said.

Though the Tejfals would appear to meet the definition of out-of-town competitors, the zoning board went ahead with its hearing after Gasiorowski told Kennedy that, while he has represented other Tejfal entities in other towns and lawsuits, he was not doing so in this case. Mitchell, he said, was his client, and the Tejfals were merely paying the bills.

A press release issued by DoubleTree to announce the October, 2010 opening of the Tinton Falls facility identified Tinton Falls Realty Lodging as a subsidiary of Hotels Unlimited. That family-owned company’s website says it owns 10 Radisson, Holiday and Days inns in Toms River, East Windsor and elsewhere, and identifies the Tejfall brothers as executives.

Mitchell, of Prospect Avenue, has consistently declined to answer reporters’ questions about his relationship to his backers. He maintains the six-story, 72-room hotel, proposed for a triangular lot on the site of a former Exxon Station at the foot of the Route 35 Cooper’s Bridge on the Navesink River, is too large for the location.

During the meat of the hearing, Gasiorowski appeared to elicit an acknowledgement from borough Engineer Christine Ballard that she had, in his words, committed “an honest mistake” by  applying the wrong height standard to the hotel property in her initial review of the Hampton plan, a decision that Gasiorowski maintains led planning and zoning director Donna Smith Barr to steer the case to the wrong board.

Though the hotel application is being heard by the planning board, Mitchell maintains it should be before the zoning board, where the criteria for winning variances are stiffer. He has also filed a lawsuit on the question.

The hearing on Mitchell’s challenge was scheduled to resume March 15.

Meantime, the planning board next meets on Monday night, and a resumption of the hotel hearing is on the agenda: RBPB agenda 030512

Five months after securing state Register of Historic Places status, Little Silver’s 347-year-old Parker Homestead has been added to that list’s national counterpart, the Asbury Park Press reports Thursday.

The borough’s oldest surviving homestead, which includes a main house and three outlying barns, the Parker property was acquired by the borough from Julia Parker, the last descendant of the original family, who passed away in 1996.

Former Mayor Suzanne Castleman, who died in July, was a driving force behind the acquisition, heading a board dedicated to the home’s preservation.

From the Press:

The most pressing issue at the homestead now is stabilizing and repairing three barns on the property, estimated to cost $500,000. However Mayor Robert C. Neff Jr. said the listing on the national register now makes the homestead eligible for federal grants to do that work.

The board is scheduled to meet March 8 at 7:30 p.m. at borough hall.

By JOHN T. WARD

In yet another twist in what’s proving to be its most tortuous case in years, the Red Bank planning board voted Wednesday to halt testimony about a proposed Hampton Inn so an objector can press his case that the wrong body is hearing the matter.

Lawyer Ron Gasiorowski, representing objector Stephen Mitchell and other, unnamed parties, persuaded the planning board to kick a question about height restrictions and jurisdiction over to the zoning board, despite vehement objections by hotel attorney Marty McGann.

“You have jurisdiction. You have a right to hear this thing,” McGann told the board. “I have an application, and I want to proceed.”

Rbank Capital LLC proposes to build a six-story, 72-room hotel overlooking the Navesink River at the junction of the Route 35 Cooper Bridge and Rector Place, on the site of a long-vacant Exxon station. Numerous hearings on the plan have been held since August without a wrap-up in the case.

Gasiorowski has already filed two lawsuits against borough entities, both of them pending in state Superior Court in Freehold.

One challenges, as arbitrary, a decision by the borough council to “correct” what officials said had been an earlier mistake: including the property in an overlay zone meant to preserve old homes on Rector Place.

The other claims the zoning board made a procedural error last May, when it ruled that the hotel proposal should be heard by the planning board. The board’s decision overruled zoning officer Donna Smith Barr, who had previously determined the project would needed a use variance and thus should go to the zoning board.

Now, following on a question that dominated the last hearing, in December, Gasiorowski said the zoning board should make the call about whether a borough height restriction is being tested, which he said would make the entire application a zoning board matter.

Now, in his request for an interpretation, Gasiorowski is asking the zoning board to referee a key question: how tall can the building be before it requires a use variance?

The question of which board hears the application is crucial because the hurdles are higher for applicants at the zoning board. A use variance cannot be approved by a mere four affirmative votes, but requires a supermajority of five or more.

Gasiorowski maintains that a provision in the borough ordinances limits any structure in the waterfront development zone, in which the hotel property sits, to 50 feet above the midway point between the center of the river and the nearest right-of-way – in this case, Rector Place. The Hampton Inn would come in at 82 feet tall, according to earlier testimony.

McGann, however, said he was prepared to prove that the ordinance does not apply to his client’s property.

But planning board attorney Michael Leckstein and Mayor Pasquale Menna, as a board member, cut him off, telling him that the planning board would await a decision from the zoning board.

“The [state] Land Use Act sets forth that interpretations are to be made by the zoning board of adjustment,” Leckstein replied. And if the zoning board agrees with Gasiorowski, “then we would not have jurisdiction.”

No date has been set for the zoning board to take up the question, and the planning board tentatively penciled in a resumption of its hearings for March 5.

That night, the board is also scheduled to hear a request to convert the Welsh Farms store on East Front Street to a 7-Eleven with a larger footprint and 24-hour operation. The start of that matter was delayed at the request of the applicant, said Leckstein.

By JOHN T. WARD

A deck fire caused by a roofing torch was quickly doused without incident at the Molly Pitcher Inn in Red Bank at midday Wednesday.

Contractors doing work on an exterior promenade accidentally set the fire at the landmark hotel and put it out with a dry chemical extinguisher, said Fire Marshal Stanley Sickels.

Still, light smoke filled a hallway on the Navesink side of the structure, he said.

The fire was reported at about 12:45 p.m. Volunteers from the Middletown Rapid Intervention team responded along with Red Bank volunteers.

By JOHN T. WARD

Red Bank RiverCenter, the downtown business-promotion entity, has gone mobile with the introduction of an app for iPhones and iPads.

“It’s part of our marketing mission, getting information about Red Bank out far and wide, and making it easy to come to the theaters and restaurants and stores in town,” says RiverCenter executive director Nancy Adams.

She envisions visitors getting off the train and using their iPhones to find places to go.

“There are who just don’t want the paper” on which directories and maps have heretofore been printed, she says.

Mimicking RiverCenter’s website, and branded with the agency’s “Only One Red Bank” slogan, the app’s meatiest element is its business directory, broken down into categories of dining, shopping arts and services.

Users can dig into “books” in the shopping list, for example, and find, well, no book stores, but two retailers carrying books among their wares.

Under “Italian” in the dining list are 20 eateries, including Mr. Pizza Slice and Sicilia Café. Listings include tap-to-call phone numbers and links to websites, where available.

The app features a page of “hot deals,” though no deals are yet being offered.

“We’re hoping to have our local ‘Groupon-ish’ feature loaded with special offers very soon, says longtime borough resident Steven Craig Sickles, who built the app, at no charge, using it as a prototype for a service he plans to offer elsewhere.

Also featured:

•  An events calendar, so far showing Tuesday night’s Menorah Lighting at the train station (no time given) and successive $5 Cheese Fridays at the Cheese Cave on Monmouth Street.

•  Municipal phone numbers

•  RSS feeds from two news sources, one of them being the area’s only independent, Authentically Local online publication: redbankgreen.

“To cement the app’s hometown appeal,” Sickles says he’ll be adding “more local interest and social networking features, including resident, local journalist and business blogs, and even a feature that will allow users to know when their other friends are in town.”

The app uses Google Maps to direct users, and as some of its familiar errors are immediately evident. The locator map for the mid-block Bagel Station on Monmouth Street, for example, shows it at the corner of Monmouth and Water streets – the actual location of Juanito’s restaurant. Juanito’s, meanwhile, appears to be located on the railroad tracks at the nearby train station.

The app still has some glitches to be worked out, Adams says. And there’s no non-Apple version available yet, though RiverCenter is exploring the possibility of getting one.

Planning board testimony about a proposed 72-room hotel at the foot of Cooper Bridge in Red Bank was put off until mid-January Monday night after a lawyer for an objector raised a question about the structure’s height.

Ron Gasiorowski, representing Stephen Mitchell, says a borough ordinance limits the hotel to 50 feet, whereas the proposed Hampton Inn is 30 feet higher than that.

No public testimony was heard, however. Instead, after waiting more than 90 minutes through a hearing on another matter, Gasiorowski huddled at the front of the room with board attorney Michael Leckstein and Hampton Inn lawyer Marty McGann, after which McGann suggested the hearing be adjourned until January 18.

Afterward, Gasiorowski said an ordinance on the books limits the height of riverfront property to 50 feet above a point midway between Rector Place, which the hotel property adjoins, and the river.

“This is 80 feet,” he said.

Borough Engineer Christine Ballard said she was unaware of the provision and did not know how it might affect the Hampton Inn proposal. But she said it could conceivably result in the hotel needing a variance, and thus make the application a matter for the zoning board, where the standard of proof for applicants is higher.

Gasiorowski has already filed a lawsuit against the town claiming that the matter was improperly routed to the planning board. That suit is pending.

McGann, though, said that the hotel’s engineer’s had accounted for the height provision, and that he was confident the case would stay with the planning board, which began hearings on the hotel in August.

“He raised a very technical question,” McGann said of Gasiorowski. “I think we’re prepared to address it at the next meeting.”

The board also put off until January 18 testimony about a planned conversion of the Welsh Farms convenience store on East Front Street to a 7-Eleven store because the applicant, a board member said, “was not ready.” About a dozen residents had turned out to raise questions and objections.