Planning Board Special Public Meeting Minutes 20150129

The following minutes are a summary of the Planning Board meeting of January 29, 2015.

Call to Order & Statement of Compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act: Chairman Nalbantian called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The following members were present: Ms. Bigos, Mr. Nalbantian, Councilwoman Knudsen, Mayor Aronsohn, Ms. Altano, Mr. Joel, Mr. Thurston, Ms. Dockray, Mr. Abdalla, and Ms. Peters. Also present were: Gail Price, Esq., Board Attorney; and Michael Cafarelli, Board Secretary. Mr. Reilly, Chris Rutishauser, Village Engineer, and Blais Brancheau, Village Planner was not in attendance.

Chairman Nalbantian made opening remarks regarding safety issues and the hearing process.

Public Comments on Topics not Pending Before the Board – No one came forward.

Correspondence received by the Board – None

Public Hearing Land Use Plan Element of the Master Plan AH-2, B-3-R, C-R and C Zone Districts

Mr. Nalbantian discussed the procedures for public comments, stating this was the first of two nights for public comment. He instructed the audience that those who wished to comment will need to write their name on the signup sheet. He gave a brief history of the 14 months the Board heard expert testimony and held public hearings. Mr. Nalbantian said speakers would have three minutes to make their comments.

Jeff Kahn, 10 Maltbie Avenue, said he thought it was time for Ridgewood to expand, build the multifamily developments, and stop saying no. Ms. Peters asked Mr. Kahn why he was just stating he is in favor of The Dayton and The Enclave and not Chestnut Village. Mr. Kahn said he spoke with individuals involved in those projects.

Francis A. Schott, 133 Highland Avenue, said the applicants are threatening to destroy the small‑town atmosphere of Ridgewood by spot zoning for multi‑story apartment buildings that would change the architecture of downtown. Applicants will be setting a precedent that can be exploited by any applicant and there will be major strains on Ridgewood's infrastructure if hundreds of apartments and over 1,000 additional residents are permitted. He said going from 12 to 50 units is not a compromise, and suggested a density of 24 units.

Anthony J. Cipriano, 260 Godwin Avenue, said lack of space was a major concern for parking and recreation. Mr. Cipriano quoted an article in the Wall Street Journal that "Many Millennials Yearn for Suburban Homes." He also referenced other articles. He said housing density needs to be looked at carefully to prevent overcrowding and the Ken Smith property would be ideal for a three story parking facility.

Philip Affuso, 255 Lotte Road, said based on conversations with people involved in the Dayton development, residents want the development to go forward as it will provide needed rental housing for long-term residents. He said the town needs commercial rateables to increase the tax revenue and the town and developers should negotiate a compromise.

Geraldine Mulhern, 255 Burnside Place, said she is in favor of the developments and hopes a solution can be found.

David Slomin, 36 Heights Road, said Ridgewood needs more housing but not at the density developers want to build, 40 or 50 units per acre. He said Ridgewood could survive with reduced densities of 20 to 25 units per acre.

Jeannette Wiener, 174 Union Street, said she supports the multifamily housing but not the density developers are seeking.

Frank Mason was called and he said he would pass.

Rurik Halaby, 374 Evergreen Place, said the Ridgewood central business district has been in decline for a number of years and adding apartments would make up for the decline. He said he knows one of the developers and this person would look out for the Village's interest, as will the other developers. He is for the multifamily developments.

James Vaughan, 99 Kenmore in Glen Rock, said he and his wife lived in Ridgewood for over thirty years and they are the empty nesters the apartments would attract. He said he supports the luxury apartments.

Tony Damiano, 274 S. Broad Street, said he has seen the Enclave and Dayton and he thinks they are not high‑rises nor unattractive, as are some of the apartment complexes. He said the town lost good people who contributed to the Village because they could not find affordable living. He is for the multifamily development and would like to see one zoned for people 55 and older.

Umit Alptuna, 328 Fairmount Road, said she is for the developments but no more than 20 to 25 units per acre. She said the town will continue to grow and it is unrealistic to try to stop the developments. She said 200 plus units could be dangerous for the Village's infrastructure and asked for responsible growth.

Ms. Peters asked Ms. Alptuna if she wanted all of the developments to remain at 20 to 25 units per acre. Ms. Alptuna said she is concerned about setting a precedent and there is a major difference between 12, 15 units per acre and the density that is currently proposed. She believes the move is too drastic.

Mayor Aronsohn asked Ms. Alptuna to clarify her numbers as she said 12 to 25, Ms. Alptuna said the current proposal is for a density of 200 plus. The Mayor said that density was incorrect and Mr. Nalbantian said the density Ms. Alptuna was referring to was 20 to 25 units per acre. Ms. Alptuna agreed.

Jeff Goldberg, 292 Mastin Place, said he thought the plans were for too much growth too soon and while many are saying the developments are for empty nesters there is no proof nor does it seem like there is enough demand for these units. He said it would be prudent to reduce the density and only build one development.

Tess Giuliani, 174 Union Street, said she was a long-term Ridgewood resident who went from a home to an apartment. She said there are only ten apartments in town that offer two bedroom, two baths, air conditioning, washer and dryer, elevator, and covered parking, and there is a very long list. Ms. Giuliani said she is for the developments and the Village needs them. Ms. Dockray asked Ms. Giuliani if she lived in the Schoolhouse Apartments and if they have balconies and outside space. Ms. Giuliani said she did, and some of the units had balconies.

Ms. Peters asked Ms. Giuliani if balconies and outdoor space were important to residents. Ms. Giuliani said it is important to step out on a Princess balcony. Ms. Peters clarified meaning a Juliette balcony and Ms. Giuliani agreed.

Kay Griffith, 159 South Irving Street, said she supports the building of one or two of the developments, as she has many friends who had to leave the town due to the lack of housing.

Jim Griffith, 159 S. Irving, discussed his fifty years as a resident and volunteer in the Village. He said he supports the developments and believes they would help the downtown area.

Anne Raftery Denyeau, 72 Woodbury Court, Township of Washington, said she lived in Ridgewood for 31 years and her family was active in the community. She talked about concerns some residents voiced about traffic and said traffic from retail establishments is greater than it is from residential developments. She asked the Board to approve the multi-unit apartments proposed.

Felicia Angus, 82 Fairmount Road, said she went to a developer meeting and the developer said it would not be profitable to build an empty nester building. She suggested the Village build a parking garage and one of the developments in a single zone. She said the town should proceed slowly and logically to avoid increasing taxes.

Pat Middleton, 128 California Street, said parking is her primary concern. She said she spoke with business owners and they all find the principal issue is parking. Ms. Middleton said the Ken Smith location would be ideal for a parking lot.

Tracey Highfill, 233 Highwood Avenue, said renters were compared with children overwhelming the schools, and home sales to large families. One family with multiple children adds to the school population. She said local shops need customers and customers need parking.

Scott Van den Bosch, 302 Stevens Avenue, said he is strongly opposed to the developments and does not think the Village is prepared for the impact they will have on the infrastructure. He said there would also be strains on mass transit with the increase of new residents. Mr. Van den Bosch said there is a life cycle to commercial development and that retail outlets may come and go, while housing units will remain and become permanent fixtures. He said if the developments were reduced and mandated for 55 and over, he did not think residents would have a problem.

Kathryn Schmidt, 123 S. Irving Street, asked what the gap is in affordable housing in Ridgewood, why not accelerate the review of the Master Plan, what are the financial costs and benefits to the village, and what is the exit strategy if things go wrong? Ms. Schmidt said she was opposed to the developments and has concerns about 3 or 4 projects, but would support one, or two and testing the theory then use the results for planning others.

9:00 P.M. There was a break and the meeting resumed at 9:10 P.M.

John Bonfiglio, 237 Waiku Road, said while he wants to see a vibrant downtown; he asked the Board to vote “no” on the proposed developments. He said developers will try to get as many units as possible and his concern is density. He said the top issues facing the merchants in the downtown area are parking. He said build more parking and it will make the downtown more vibrant. He said he is not against multifamily housing but the density should be below 50 units.

Robert Kotch, 60 N. Hillside Place, said he is opposed to the proposed changes in the Master Plan. He said he thought most people did not realize that the proposal is not just for four developments but a change in the Master Plan. He said the Board should move slowly and look at what works in other towns. He said Ridgewood is a small town and the downtown should offer other types of commercial enterprises to attract people from outside Ridgewood and when done they can take mass transit back to their communities.

Lisa Baney, 136 Brookside Avenue, said many residents who want to stay in Ridgewood live in the central business district, use mass transit, and enjoy downtown. She said the issue is density. Ms. Baney said there is a problem when no one can discuss the math and the business strategy that underpins the necessity to change the Master Plan, in this case allowing high density. She said residents are asking for moderation before any change to the Master Plan.

Paul Vagianos, 280 Rivera Court, said he supports the Master Plan amendment because the properties have been dormant for years and need development. He said if the Board votes no, the Village may get something they do not want because the properties will not remain vacant forever. He said the primary issue for the downtown is parking.

Ms. Peters asked Mr. Vagianos if he would give up one of his cars if he got an apartment. She also said that not all of the developments would have parking for two cars. Mr. Vagianos said he might give up one of his cars as he does little driving now.

Ms. Peters discussed the parking challenges with the developments, in particular, those with only one parking space per unit and the issue of parking for guests and residents that have more than one car.

Amy Beirsdorf, 50 S. Murray Avenue, detailed the challenges with traffic and school-aged children. She does not believe the empty nesters will occupy 200 to 300 units at the rents discussed and she would like to see some development happen, but thinks the Board needs to be careful and responsible in its actions.

Melinda Carley, 139 Richards Road, said one cannot function in Ridgewood without a car and that she would like to have units to move her parents into. However, if that were to occur they both would bring their cars.

Ron Simoncini, 249 Bogart Avenue said he is a Ridgewood resident and is working for Mr. John Saraceno, one of the developers. He said on properties with uses that will never return, and the impacts of the building what you could currently build there is worse than anything that will happen for the multi‑family. It should be the use in demand, which now is housing, and the use that will provide Ridgewood the best impact. He said the Board has seen the drawings, and the plans, and knows that other buildings of the same exact size for other uses can be built there.

Jeff Coster, 505 Upper Boulevard, said times have changed and the property zoned for the car dealerships will never return. People are shopping online, and the Planning Board and the Master Plan needs to address the fact that we have properties, we have space that are essentially zoned for uses that will probably never come back, and we have to ask ourselves: How do we make use of those spaces so they support the town, make it a vibrant downtown?

Brian Abdoo, 308 W. Ridgewood Avenue, said he is not opposed to the developments but has issues with the density. He does not want more than 12 units per acre. He also is concerned about the increase in school children. He said the Board should vote to approve all of the developments at a density level that would not change the community or put the schools at risk.

Kristine Rusch, 87 California Street, is concerned that the proposed housing is too dense for Ridgewood. She said the proposed Master Plan amendment should be reviewed with respect to open space and recreational facilities. Ms. Rusch said any amendment to the Master Plan should maintain the spirit of the current Master Plan and development should proceed slowly. Ms. Price asked Ms. Rusch if the reports she referred to were Ms. Bogart's report and asked who authored the 25-page report. Ms. Rusch stated she thought it was from Mr. Weiner's law firm. Ms. Price clarified that two reports were legal and planning.

Thomas Flynn, 431 Wastina Terrace, said he understood the rents for the proposed apartments would be in the $3,000 per month range which would translate into $36,000 a year. He said if the seniors were paying annual taxes of $15,000 the rent would be more than double than what they are currently paying for property taxes. He said if the town does not have enough parking then more parking should be built.

James McCarthy, 153 Hope Street, said the Village has an unmet need for housing and underutilized properties and the proposal to develop 50 units per acre has put the residents on the defensive. He said the residents can chose to do nothing and allow the developers to apply for variances or they can move for an amendment for 22 to 26 units per acre and he trusts the government will move forward with smaller units.

Andrew Watson, 300 Highland Avenue, said the downtown area is not struggling, it is vibrant and would do better with more parking. He said a survey should be done to determine if there is a population that wants to live in a studio or one-bedroom apartment by the railroad. He said he thought the density level should not exceed 25 units per acre and the height should not exceed 45 feet.

Ms. Peters asked Mr. Watson if he considered any height concession for affordable housing. Mr. Watson said he would.

Ms. Peters asked Mr. Simoncini if he could detail why the process he believes is different as opposed to the process he sees in development in other areas, and could he name where he has done this, where it is a different process, is it more successful, or less successful? Mr. Simoncini said it would be a significant amount of work. He said the reason things are different in Ridgewood is that there is a large population of committed, sophisticated, and educated professionals. He said there are people that are knowledgeable about the political opportunity to obfuscate in a situation like this to create a situation where they can delay, delay, and they are very clever about the process; that sophistication level is not typical in most towns.

The hearing was adjourned at 10:30 p.m., to be continued on February 3, 2015.

The meeting was closed to the public.

Respectfully submitted,

                                                                        Michael Cafarelli

                                                                        Board Secretary

Date approved: April 21, 2015