TRAFFIC AN ISSUE FOR HOTEL PLAN
Planning board member Ed Zipprich and alternates Barbara Boas and Linda Cohen pore over plans for a hotel proposed for the Red Bank end of the Cooper Bridge. A second-story floor plan, below. (Photos by Stacie Fanelli. Click to enlarge)
By DUSTIN RACIOPPI
The fate of a large-scale hotel envisioned at the northern gateway to Red Bank could hinge on a turn signal.
Opening testimony by professionals of the Hampton Inn and Suites proposal, prompted some planning board members to balk at the idea of making the current two-opening driveway just one. Expressing concern for motorists trying to get across the “speedway” of Route 35, they pressed the developer to “make things right” at a busy and troublesome intersection.
Officials who will eventually vote on some 20 requested variances for the former filling station site also showed concern about the look of the six-story building so its roof line doesn’t resemble the the deck “of the old Queen Mary.”
A handful of professionals working on the 76-room hotel gave more than two hours of testimony to the board Monday, covering the hotel’s basic functions, showing conceptual graphics and outlining traffic flows.
While the proposal to replace the current two openings at the site with just one entrance and exit was well-received, the traffic engineer’s proposal to allow a left turn out of the property made some board members cringe.
The site sits on the west side of Route 35, where two-lane highway traffic coming from Middletown broadens to three lanes, and motorists from Red Bank pour onto the highway from three directions heading north.
“To me, it’s a dealbreaker if you let somebody make a left-hand turn out of that property,” board member Guy Maratta said.
Engineer Gary Dean said allowing the left turn would keep hotel guests who want to head north from first heading south and then making illegal u-turns in the vicinity of the intersection, where Route 35, Riverside Avenue, Bridge Avenue and Rector Place meet.
But it’s not the board’s problem to worry about what drivers may or may not legally do, Maratta said. Its charge is safety, and the multi-laned stretch at that section of 35 is like a speedway, he said.
“It’s a very dangerous turn,” he said.
Mayor Pasquale Menna recommended the developers apply to the state Department of Transportation for permission to install a no-left sign at the exit of the hotel, which, if approved, would be enforceable by police. If not, a sign can still be installed, but only as an advisory. That would still satisfy the board’s concerns, Menna and Maratta agreed.
Still up in the air is the exterior appearance of the hotel.
Architect Lewis Silverstein presented two options to the board, each of which would require height variances. Both sported a brick-and-synthetic-stucco facade, but there are two possibilities for the top of the building. One would have the building at 82-feet tall, with mechanical equipment for the structure exposed. Another plan shows the equipment shielded from view by an eight-foot-high parapet.
The board was amenable to hiding the components with some sort of screening to keep it from looking “like the Old Queen Mary,” Menna said. Silverstein said the components need to be on the roof to release air and steam. Although surrounding buildings’ mechanics are exposed on the roof, Menna said this was a chance for the board to clean up the view of Red Bank, and some sort of screening is “a better planning option.”
Vice Chairman Dan Mancuso also suggested Silverstein tweak the plan to add brick to the rear of the building facing Middletown so it looks similar to the front.
Though the board kept quiet for most of the testimony, each professional met opposition afterward.
Prospect Avenue resident Stephen Mitchell, perhaps the most outspoken opponent of the plan, was at the microphone at every opportunity with a notebook in hand, pelting witnesses with questions and, out of line with procedures, statements. At the end of each speaker’s testimony, board procedures only allow for questions, and public comments are reserved for the end of all testimony.
When Mitchell, who says the hotel plan is too large for the site, said he’d work overtime to pay the legal fees for an attorney to counter some of the professionals’ findings, board member Stanley Sickels put a halt to Mitchell’s time on the floor.
“You’re making a statement,” Sickels said. “Why are you threatening us?”
When it was time for the project’s principal manager, Larry Cohen, to testify, Menna asked him a simple, yet burning question: is there a need for another hotel in this area?
“Yes there is,” Cohen replied. “We have studies that show that.”
He did not produce any studies.
Cohen, the principle manager for the applicant, Rbank Capital LLC, said the hotel would plug a hole in the area by offering a convenient place to stay for the transient business professionals. The hotel would be little more than a place to sleep, exercise a little and read a newspaper over coffee. There is no restaurant, bar, banquet area or large conference rooms proposed in what is classified as a “limited service hotel,” Cohen said.
“What we’re catering to is the business population,” said Cohen, of Old Bridge. “There is a large office clientele we’re looking to pull in.”
And if projections are accurate, Red Bank would stand to gain not only in collecting property taxes, but also through municipal occupancy taxes, which places a three-percent tax on hotel revenue, he said.
If the hotel maintains a 70- to 75-percent occupancy rate, Red Bank would be looking at an additional $75,000 to $80,000 a year in revenue, he said.
Construction at the 1.04-acre site would take about 11 months, Cohen said.
The hearing was continued to Wednesday, September 7.
Aug 16, 2011 @ 12:43:48
I have no objection, what-so-ever, to this site being developed in a safe and smart manner. The plan proposed by Hampton Inn is neither smart nor safe. Residents of Red Bank need to know what a colossal ugly building this will be, situated at the most prominent entrance to our community.
Please come to the next Planning Board Meeting on September 7th and tell your officials how you feel about this. They need to hear from you. Complaining about a large building resting on 20 stills (to accommodate parking beneath the building) after it is built is useless. Now is the time to speak up and affect change in your community.
STAND UP AND TELL THE PLANNING BOARD THAT THIS PROJECT IS TOO BIG, TOO TALL, AND TOO INTENSE FOR THE TINY PROPERY!!!
Aug 16, 2011 @ 15:01:47
How dare you insult the Queen Mary ,by even suggesting this building resembles any part of her ……….
Aug 16, 2011 @ 19:32:52
You assume you know which Queen Mary he meant.
Aug 17, 2011 @ 07:56:02
I agree We do have a need for hotels in the area I dont think people realize how fast these place book up on weekends for weddings the track beach etc. Especially during the summer. I just had family in from out of town and they were scrambling to find a place when the weekend rate at the moly went to 350 a night and ended up at my brothers.
But Please I hope if you do build something i get rid of that eye sore …. do a better job then that god awful places on Wallace street. That is just awful what they did there I shake my head every time i pass it. talk about an eye sore. How many people are living there now ? I sure miss those historic lovely homes. Some of the nicer ones in town
Aug 17, 2011 @ 11:47:24
I have a few comments on this:
1. We do not need another hotel. How many large buildings do we really think can fit into Red Bank before we are completely out of space? And then the borough council has the audacity to say that nothing can be constructed at 90 West Front Street, yet they are considering this monstrosity!
2. Kudos to Steven for taking a stand on this issue. I hope that more people will join him in vocal opposition at the next borough council meeting.
3. Leave it to our omnipotent Administrator to stop the free speech of a concerned borough resident. Independent investigation should be encouraged, not stomped on and written off as a threat. Another great show of how unaccountable and nontransparent our local government is.
Aug 17, 2011 @ 11:50:59
@ Donald- Judging by information on this proposal, the monstrosity on Wallace Street will probably look beautiful next to this. I don’t know about you, but I don’t think it’s a good idea to put such a large building on such a small property, not to mention how busy that intersection is. Plus, as Stephen mentioned in his comment, this building will be at the opening of our town, so everyone will see this ugly structure as soon as they come across the bridge from Middletown.
Aug 17, 2011 @ 12:48:11
Pat,
Apparently you have never planned an event (wedding, party, shower, etc) & realized that there are NEVER enough hotel rooms in Red Bank to accomodate even a modest amount of people. They usually fill pretty quickly.
That being said….this is a terrible place for a hotel, the traffic impact will be a nightmare. You will never be able to enter this property except from Route 35 south.
Aug 17, 2011 @ 15:07:46
Whatever the Hampton Inn folks want, the Hampton Inn folks will get!!! NO to the YMCA, NO to the community garden.Get the drift?
Aug 17, 2011 @ 22:56:04
Jennifer- Out of curiosity, do you know of any other locations where a hotel could feasibly be built? I’m not trying to be condescending or anything like that, just wanted to see if you had any other locations in mind. Regardless, I think we agree that this location isn’t the right spot for it.
Aug 17, 2011 @ 23:39:55
Jeff:
I don’t get the drift.
It was yes to the YMCA.
They compromised and scaled back their plan because they didn’t get the votes they needed on their original plan.
Time will tell if Hampton gets whatever they want. I think they won’t.
Pat, if a hotel is a permitted use RB must consider the plan that’s submitted.
And whether they, you, me or anyone else thinks we need any more hotels isn’t relevant.
I think it’s funny that the posters most likely to insinuate there’s corruption involved in these decisions also think the Planning Board can just reject applications because they just don’t like the idea behind the proposed project.
If these applications were subject to the mere whims of Planning and Zoning Boards would that foster less corruption or more corruption?
Aug 18, 2011 @ 09:02:56
Pat,
Not sure about a location. I’m also guessing that would also depend on the type of hotel & who is the developer. The problem with having events/weddings in Red Bank is that you are locked in to the Molly or Oyster Point – which are owned by the same people. Doesn’t leave much price competition. I know there is a Marriott out on Half Mile Road, but that isn’t always convenient for some. & it’s also not in Red Bank.
I’d like to see a more botique type hotel – like Bungalow in Pier Village, but that would probably not happen in Red Bank. I think it would be a nicer addition than a Hampton Inn.
Just my opinion.
Sep 06, 2011 @ 13:37:30
Mitchell Come to the Red Bank Planning Board meeting tomorrow night, September 7th at 7:00pm, to oppose the Hampton Inn Hotel project and tell your representatives this project is TOO BIG, TOO TALL, AND TOO INTENSE FOR THE 1 ACRE LOT. It will be twice the density of the Molly Pitcher and 50% more dense than the Oyster Point, and Taller. Not to mention the site is CONTAMINATED, and they have no plans for remediation. Instead they are proposing to build the building on stilts. This monstrosity will be the first thing people see when they drive through our towns most prominent gateway.
THE PLANNING BOARD NEEDS TO HEAR FROM YOU!!!
Nov 07, 2011 @ 12:30:07
Stop the Hampton Inn Hotel!!!
Come to the Red Bank Planning Board meeting tonight at 7pm, and tell the Board this 6-story 76-room 78-stall parking lot is TOO BIG, TOO TALL, AND TOO INTENSE for this tiny 1 acre lot. The Board needs to hear from YOU!!!
Otherwise, with little or no public opposition, the Board will approve this and we’ll be stuck with a huge monstrosity at the gateway to our town for many years to come.
Now is the time to stop this.
Now is the time to speak up.
Tell the Board this project is TOO BIG, TOO TALL, AND TOO INTENSE!!!