patching...
Update: Follow New Milford Patch on Facebook »
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

Public Gets To Question United Water Property Development Plan Tonight

Hearing picks up with public questioning of expert's testimony on flooding and drainage systems included in site plan to alleviate flooding.

 

Tuesday night's meeting of the Zoning Board will allow the public to ask questions of New Milford Redevelopment Associates' expert Michael Dipple, an engineer and principal of L2A Land Design in Englewood, who spent much of his four hours of testimony at the April 19 meeting alleviating concerns regarding flooding.

New Milford Redevelopment Associates (NMRA), a company headed by Peter Hekemian, V.P. of Development for the S. Hekemian Group, is seeking preliminary and final site plan approval for the 13-acre United Water property

The application includes:

  • 70,500 sq ft supermarket 
  • 221 residential units with 428-spaced parking garage 
  • 88 one bedroom apartments; 117 two bedroom apartments; 16 three bedroom apartments
  • 4300 sq ft bank 

Despite the hours of testimony thus far, the crux of NMRA's argument is cited in their letter dated Jan. 3, 2012 that accompanied the filing of the site plans with the the borough's zoning official. In that letter, Andy DelVecchio, an attorney with the Montvale law firm Beattie Padovano who is representing the interests of NMRA, wrote, "While the proposed development is consistent with your Master Plan, the proposed use and density are not currently permitted in the Residential A Zone."

DelVecchio is citing the Borough's 2004 Master Plan that explicitly deems the property "currently underutilized" and recommends mixed-use development. (See pages 56 and 57.) Any Zoning Board of Adjustment application must refer to the borough's Master Plan recommendations.  

If the application of NMRA is denied by the Zoning Board the developer can go before the Mayor and Council to ask for a zoning change from its current residential status to mixed-use and cite the 2004 Master Plan as being on their side. 

Although NMRA's site plans fit in with the recommendation of the 2004 Master Plan, the property was never re-zoned to include mixed-use development. Therefore, any development that is not singe-family residential needs variances and variances fall under the purview of the Zoning Board which is why DelVecchio requested an immediate denial from the borough's zoning official in his January letter. With the zoning official's denial, the hearing could proceed without delay to the Zoning Board of Adjustment.

The Zoning Board of Adjustment is primarily responsible for the granting of variances from zoning regulations on proposed projects. For example, if that new kitchen you want to build causes your building to exceed the maximum coverage requirement, you would go to your zoning board. If the deck you want to add juts into the side yard space, you would go to the zoning board to seek permission to vary from the regulation. If, as in the case of NMRA, you want to build a mixed-use complex in a residential zone, the Zoning Board of Adjustment is the board who can approve variances. 

Also on the agenda, Fresh & Fancy Farms is seeking variances allowing relocation of an existing greenhouse, construction of a new greenhouse, construction of a 36' x 60' barn, permission to pave a portion of the property between Stockton Street and the existing house and barn and installation of a 12 foot high, 6' x 6' double sided sign facing River Road.

Additionally, Sanzari's New Bridge Inn wants to expand and is seeking variances for use, impervious lot coverage, front and side yard setbacks, parking and signs. 

For those who missed the inaugural meeting of the newly formed grassroots group SOD, "Stop Over Development," they are scheduled to make their first united appearance at tonight's hearing. 

Related Topics: Flooding, Hekemian, Master plan, Michael Dipple, New Milford Redevelopment Associates, SOD, Stop Over Development, United Water property, and Zoning Board

Lori Barton

12:30 pm on Tuesday, May 8, 2012

Two comments: First, I don't think Mr. Dipple alleviated anyone's concerns regarding flooding in his 4 hours of testimony. That may have been his intention but we all know that his testimony is going to be favorable to the developer. The fact remains that allowing development on flood plains will contribute to more flooding. Just ask Mr. Henning of United Water. Secondly, while there are 88 one bedroom apartments planned, many of them will include a "den." The only difference between a "den" and a second bedroom is the lack of a closet. Does anyone seriously doubt that the majority of these one bedroom/den apartments will be used as 2 bedroom apartments?

Reply

miriam pickett

1:24 pm on Tuesday, May 8, 2012

Until we get to hear a completely impartial expert comment on the risk of flooding in the propsed site, I think New Milford residents and members of SOD are well within their rights to be skeptical.

Reply

Lisa Nachberg

2:35 pm on Tuesday, May 8, 2012

@ Miriam-how do we identify an impartial, well versed, seasoned expert. Previous attempts, to do so have been futile, as many "experts' have an agenda that compromises both intergity and objectivity in these Matter$.

Reply

Battle

2:57 pm on Tuesday, May 8, 2012

Can someone explain to me why we need another apartment complex in this town. How about putting some there that helps the town period. This is a joke. Comon folks wake up and lets get something built that benefits us. All another apartment complex does is bring in undesirables , doesn't increase ratables and adds to population.

Reply

jimmy

4:46 pm on Tuesday, May 8, 2012

Battle-Not to mention, stressing out our police department and roadways. Also, we don't have enough volunteer firefighters or ambulance corps personnel as it is right now. The traffic would be a nightmare. I live on the north end of town, and now on a friday night at 5:30pm, it takes me 15 minutes to get to New Bridge Road. We cannot let this development happen.

Reply

Jeffrey DelVecchio

7:19 pm on Tuesday, May 8, 2012

Does anybody care that Sanzari wants to increase it's impervious lot coverage? They certainly are in a flood zone and impervious coverage increases flooding potential by increasing runoff.

Reply

Ulises

10:57 pm on Tuesday, May 8, 2012

Yes, Mr. DelVecchio, I care. Do you?

Reply
Comment_arrow

Jeffrey DelVecchio

7:35 am on Wednesday, May 9, 2012

As a matter of fact, I do. Generally speaking, impervious coverage should be limited and alternate building methods should be used when possible. Things like permeable pavers, green roofs, rain collections systems, etc. Minimizing runoff is a very important step towards avoiding or reducing flooding even if you are not in a flood plain.

Comment_arrow

Ulises

9:34 am on Wednesday, May 9, 2012

That's great! See you on the 15th, at the Library, at 7 PM.

Lori Barton

11:32 pm on Tuesday, May 8, 2012

Mr. DelVecchio, ALL of New Milford needs to come together on this and on the application from Sanzari. STOP OVER DEVELOPMENT (SOD) in ALL of New Milford. Don't allow any more development on flood plains.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Jeffrey DelVecchio

7:36 am on Wednesday, May 9, 2012

Do you know when SOD is planning its next meeting? I would like to attend.

Comment_arrow

Michelle

7:52 pm on Wednesday, May 9, 2012

Do you mind Jeffrey, if I ask if you're related to Antimo DelVecchio, Hekemian's attorney, and are you a New Milford resident? Sorry...I know that's horrible!

Comment_arrow

Jeffrey DelVecchio

6:49 pm on Thursday, May 10, 2012

@Michelle, I have no relation to the person you mentioned nor do I have any affiliation with anyone from Hekemian. I have lived in New Milford for over 12 years now. I am currently trying to get the Board of Health to change the ordinance here so I can raise chickens in my backyard. There have been several articles here on Patch about me and I have written 12 blog posts about it. I support the cause of reducing over development on all fronts if for no other reason than over development is not evironmentally friendly.

Ulises

12:54 am on Wednesday, May 9, 2012

Thank you Suez/United Water, for your overdevelopment contributions to a 100 year food zone, your 'no release' policy/poor mismanagement of the reservoir (that ruins our fields, infrastructure, etc...) and for always reminding us of what a horrible neighbor you are to the town of New Milford (just got back from another zoning board meeting your buyer/developer is clearly trying to sell...).

Mr. Rich Hennings, VP Corp. Communication - Suez/United Water (who lived on Havord Street in NM, years ago), please read up on this topic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_social_responsibility

SOD!

Reply

miriam pickett

10:37 am on Wednesday, May 9, 2012

There will be a meeting of SOD on May 15 at the Library at 7:00 pm. We welcome all concerned New Milford and Oradell citizens to come and participate. The more people who become active in this battle the better our chances for defeating this proposal. As we can see from these interminable meetings, this is going to take a long time. I urge everyone not to give up coming to the meetings. That's exactly what their strategy - exhaust the public - and they'll lose interest.

See you all on the 15th.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Emily Rostkowski

10:56 am on Wednesday, May 9, 2012

@miriam, that is exactly their strategy! The next zoning board meeting is May 17th, from 7-11pm. The applicant will have the entire 4 hours at this special meeting. Although it takes time away from your families...one evening twice a month,at most, is well worth it! If you don't come out, and support your town...in the long run you have no right to complain about whatever happens. Lack of attendance will side with the applicant and looks like acceptance with the application. Even if you don't know what to say, or don't want to speak, just being there taking a space in the peanut gallery shows the board you mind, you care, that the public isn't okay with this. Just last night in front of Shoprite in the rain, immediately following the meeting, at 11pm another pedestrian was struck and injured. And that's in front of a 35,000 shopping center that closes. It's not a 70,500 sq foot megastore with 900 spaces and possibly open 24 hours. Imagine the pedestrian safety there? Show your support!!!! SOD

miriam pickett

7:52 pm on Wednesday, May 9, 2012

Lisa, if the board hires third party experts at the expense of Hekemian, there is every reason to believe these experts will give impartial analyses of the proposal. I understand that the way it works they would have no direct contact with Hekemian. The money comes from an eschrow account.

Reply

Leave a comment