20210406 - Planning Board Public Meeting Minutes

Ridgewood Planning Board

Virtual Online Public Meeting

April 6, 2021

The following minutes are a summary of the Planning Board meeting of April 6, 2021. Interested parties may request an audio recording of the meeting from the Board Secretary for a fee.

Call to Order & Statement of Compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act: Chairman Joel called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.

Roll Call – The following members were present: Mayor Knudsen, Chief Van Goor, Councilwoman Reynolds, Richard Joel, Dianne O’Brien, Melanie Hooban, Frances Barto, Alysson Wesner and Darlene Johnson. Also present were Stephen Wellinghorst, Board Attorney; Maryann Bucci-Carter, Village Planner, and Jane Wondergem, Board Secretary. Debbie Patire and Igor Lyubarskiy were absent.

Public Comments on Topics not Pending Before the Board – There were no comments at this time.

Committee/Commission/Professional Updates for Non Agenda Topics – Mayor Knudsen reported that there were a number of applicants for Historic Preservation Commission and the Commission should be reinstated within weeks. Mayor Knudsen said the Council and the Boards should be transitioning to having in-person meetings in May.

Historic Preservation Commission review: 54 East Ridgewood Landmark, LLC, Felina Café, 54 East Ridgewood Avenue – Rooftop Bar – Benjamin Wine, Esq., was present on behalf of the applicant.

John Mazza, general contractor, described the proposed materials, using the architectural drawings. Mr. Mazza described the proposed movable panel to be used by the windows, the staircase. The side facing the neighbor tenants will be painted as requested by Mr. Hadadan, and the side facing the bar area will be painted to match the décor. The panels would be set up when the bar area is open, and taken down when closed. The back of the cooking area was changed to paneling and the railing around the parapet will be wrought iron.

Board members suggested that the colors from the ground floor outdoor area be brought up to the roof top area. The applicant agreed to do that. Board members asked how the panels would be put in place. Board members asked if there would be noise when it rained due to the metal roof. Mr. Mazza said the roof material is over plywood and a rubber material so there would not be noise.

Romen Hadadan, 22 Prospect Street, asked about the height of the panel and if the windows in his building would be replaced and clarified the hours the bar would be open. Mr. Mazza said his windows would be replaced with double pane windows and Mr. Wine said they would abide by Village regulations.

The Board was favorable to the application with the changes discussed.

54 East Ridgewood Landmark, LLC, 54 East Ridgewood Avenue, Block 3809, Lot 7.01 – Adoption of Memorializing Resolution of Approval for Minor Site Plan Approval and Variance Relief – This matter was carried to the April 20, 2021 meeting.

555 Maple Acquisition Inc., 555 and 565 N. Maple Avenue, Block 2904, Lots 20-26 – Application for Preliminary and Final Major Site Plan approval, Exception from Design Standards and Variance relief as needed to permit the use of a portion of the Property as a surface parking area with an accessory pedestrian shelter (Carried from March 2, 2021 without further notice and without prejudice to the Board) Jonathan Drill, Esq., entered his appearance on behalf of the applicant and made opening remarks. Mr. Drill explained that the property was formerly a Ford dealership and that a portion of the property, lots 22-26, are now proposed to be a commuter parking area for Valley Hospital employees, where they would shuttle to and from the Valley Hospital site in Paramus.

Alexander Lapatka was sworn and his credentials as an engineer and planning expert were accepted. Mr. Lapatka described the existing conditions on the property. Mr. Lapatka stated that lots 20 and 21 are not part of this application. Mr. Lapatka testified as to the site plan describing the existing conditions and the proposed expansion of the existing lot, the number of parking spaces including 5 handicap parking spaces. A bus shelter is proposed for the south side of the lot. Mr. Lapatka showed photos of a bus shelter that Valley Hospital is using in a lot in Paramus as an exhibit. Mr. Lapatka displayed page 4 of the plans and testified regarding the proposed landscaping on the North Maple Avenue side of the lot and the plantings and fence along the west side of the lot. There will be 2 planter boxes by the bus shelter. Mr. Lapatka stated that the landscaping and planter boxes would be up kept by a landscaper, and the planted landscaping would be serviced by irrigation. Mr. Lapatka testified regarding snow removal, stating that the northwest corner of the site would be used, or the snow would be removed from the site if needed. In regards to lighting, the old poles would be removed and replaced with 3 poles with 2 fixtures on each which would be individually controlled and programmable.

Mr. Lapatka stated that the shuttle would run every 15 minutes from 6:30 am to 9:30 am and from 4 pm to 8 pm, and run hourly from 9:30 am to 4 pm, on Monday through Friday.

Mr. Lapatka said that the site would not have an attendant, but would have periodic oversight by Valley Hospital security. The applicant would consider putting a chain across the entrance during off hours. Valley Hospital would give Title 39 authority to the Ridgewood Police Department.

Mr. Lapatka addressed the variances being requested. In regards to lots 20 and 21, which are not part of this application, the setback to residential property is an existing nonconformity which they are proposing to continue. Mr. Lapatka testified that for the proposed parking lot on lots 22-26, the parking spaces on the northerly line are up against the property line, where a 5-foot setback is required, which is an existing condition, and that Valley owns the neighbor lot, therefore, no one is being negatively affected. Mr. Lapatka stated that the parking lot use would be temporary until the new parking facility in Paramus is complete.

Mr. Lapatka testified that there would be no significant traffic impact as the employees using the lot work different shifts and the vehicles are parked for a long duration of time. There would be no dumpster on the property. Mr. Lapatka stated that there would be no significant noise impact.

Board members asked about the fencing along the eastern part of the property and if it was owned by Valley. Mr. Lapatka said there are multiple fences, but that all the Valley owned fences would be removed and replaced. Board members asked about the capacity of the shuttle buses and if the bus shelter was big enough. Board members asked about safety issues. Mr. Drill said that the buses would carry 12-16 people and that the shuttle driver would see that everyone gets to their cars safely. Board members asked how they would prevent people from sleeping in the bus shelter during off hours. Mr. Drill said they could lock the shelter at night.

Board members asked about the route the shuttle drivers would use. The applicant didn’t know that at this time.

Board members asked if spaces along the eastern property line could be reduced for compact cars and the curb moved in 2 feet to provide more landscaping. Ms. Bucci-Carter said that would be an additional variance for parking space size. Mr. Drill said that they would do that and requested the additional variance.

Board members were concerned about the condition of the building and safety issues on lots 20 and 21. Mr. Drill explained that the insurance company will not permit them to repair the building until an investigation is complete. The Board asked them to put a temporary fence around the building for safety reasons.

Public questions:

Beth Ann DiLorenzo, 576 Barnett Place, asked about the lighting and Mr. Lapatka explained about the LED lights and the programmability and that they should not spill over to the neighbors. Ms. DiLorenzo suggested they should lock the bus shelter.

There were no comments from the public and the hearing was closed.

Following Board deliberation, Ms. O’Brien made a motion to approve with the conditions discussed. Chief Van Goor seconded, and all Board members voted yes to approve the application.

Discussion re: Updating Master Plan – Mr. Joel said the Master Plan subcommittee met and reviewed the RFQ which was submitted to the Board. Mayor Knudsen suggested that the RFQ should be more specific about the start time and that there should be a projected date of completion. The Board agreed that the RFQ should be advertised and they should move forward with the Master Plan update.

Adoption of Minutes:  The minutes from March16, 2021, were approved.

The meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m.

                                                                                      Respectfully submitted,

                                                                                      Jane Wondergem

                                                                                      Board Secretary

Date Approved:   April 20, 2021