Developer: 191-Unit Luxury Apartment Complex 'Best Use' for Island Road Property
But, a borough board questioned the impact the development might have on neighbors, the school system and the rest of the town
Photos
A 191-unit, five-story, transient-oriented luxury apartment building is the most desirable type of development for a five-acre plot of land on Island Road currently occupied by Ramsey Lumber, a developer looking to build an apartment complex on the site argued at the first session of a Zoning Board of Adjustment public hearing Wednesday night.
On behalf of his firms – Russo Acquisitions and Russo Development – Ed Russo argued the land, which is directly across from the NJ Transit rail station on Route 17, is “uniquely and specifically suited” for the development he proposed.
The apartment complex would include a mix of one, two and three-bedroom units that would start leasing at $2,000 a month, Russo said. The proposed complex is made up of four floors of apartments on top of two floors of covered parking lots, one aboveground level and one basement-level. Common spaces in the complex includes an outdoor courtyard and heated pool with lounge areas and a fire pit, a clubroom, media lounge, and fitness center, as well as on-site property managers and a concierge service.
The units, Russo said, were designed to target two groups of potential renters – young commuter couples who he said will “take advantage” of the proximity of the complex to the rail station, and local empty nesters who want to remain in the area but are looking to downsize.
Russo Acquisitions started a multi-night hearing Wednesday applying for several zoning variances it would need approved before it could build the project, including a land use variance, as the current zoning of the property does not allow for multi-family developments. Russo is also seeking a height variance, as zoning ordinances in the area only allow for three-story buildings, not five.
But, Russo argued some of the uses that would be allowed on the land – like industrial developments, retail centers and office complexes – would not ideally fit the land in question.
The lot also includes land on the adjacent Ferguson Place, on which Russo is proposing to build seven single-family homes on quarter-acre subdivided lots.
“We felt that development would compliment the residential developments already there,” he said.
The homes would be blocked from the apartment complex by a line of 10-12-foot evergreen trees planted between the two lots, he said.
Though Ramsey’s Master Plan specifically favors single-family over multi-family developments, Russo argued Wednesday that the 2006 document, which makes development recommendations for the borough, warns against multi-family complexes because of their potential impact on traffic.
“We felt this property was different, and could be developed without that negative consequence,” he said.
At a later hearing, Russo said he will present a traffic engineer to testify as an expert witness about the estimated impact to traffic. The engineer will be one of five experts set to testify on topics ranging from the fiscal impact the development might have on the borough’s tax rate, to the impact more students moving to the borough might have on the school system.
Though Russo only presented an outline of the proposal to the board Wednesday night, members had a long list of questions about the development, whether or not another type of development might be better for the property, and the impacts the proposed apartment complex might have on the borough.
Members asked questions on the company’s background with other residential building projects, to see data from other similar developments in Bergen County, and the impacts those have had on the communities they are in.
The board also questioned the borough would need a taller ladder truck to respond to a five-story building, and if so where it would physically house a taller truck, since it would not fit inside the current firehouse. The environmental condition of the land – which has been used as a lumber yard for many years – and whether or not the development would stress the school system were also among board questions.
Ramsey’s interim Superintendent of Schools Bruce DeYoung said at a school board meeting Tuesday night that district officials would also be watching the ongoing hearing closely to monitor what the impact of a concentrated influx of students might be.
Still, Russo said he feels the development would be beneficial for Ramsey, and testimony expected at future hearings will elaborate on why.
“Buildable land is a scarce resource in Ramsey, and there are not a lot of newly-built living options in Ramsey for people looking to move here,” he said. “And, this is a very desirable community to live in.”
Russo’s testimony on the development was carried to a Jan. 16 meeting.
Get Patched in with the Ramsey Patch newsletter. And, get updates on the Ramsey Patch Facebook and Ramsey Patch Twitter.
psumba
8:59 am on Thursday, December 20, 2012
So, this isn't 5 floors ... it is 6 ... using the metrics that Ramsey has consistently applied in the past (where sub-surface parking counts as a floor of the building).
Do they really think that 10-12' trees will hide this from the neighbors?
Why would an office complex NOT fit the use of this land?
Jessica Mazzola
12:37 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
Hey psumba -- I think the developer may go into this more at future meetings, but last night he said there isn't a big market for office space in this area. He cited a figure of 24% vacancy rate in area office buildings. He also argued a retail development like a strip mall wouldn't have Route 17 frontage and would then be less desirable for potential renters. For industrial space, he said the proximity to residences that are already there makes the site a bad one for industrial developments. He also said the land is "too good" for an industrial development.
psumba
9:17 am on Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Jessica, my issue was primarily driven by issues with the planning board in the past WRT commercial property that I own. The concept of a basement in a proposed version of the building would have limited it to being two stories. The "justification" for this was fire safety. I just wanted to point out the precedent that has been set in issues like this by the planning board. Our legal system currently highly values precedent!
I'd hate to live along Indian Valley Road or High Street if this is built as described. Those folks won't see the sun for much of the day ... since they are directly west of the development.
BTW: I can't speak for others, but my commercial property is essentially 100% rented at present.
Angie Kelly
9:37 am on Thursday, December 20, 2012
and renting to "new family commuters" and "empty nesters" with no kids? how do they know that?? anything with more than 2 bedrooms is potential for kids and our schools can't handle it ....period
Leaking Ink
9:52 am on Thursday, December 20, 2012
Why would young commuters and empty nesters need a 3-bedroom apartment?
One bedroom starting at $2,000.00 is a bit steep, especially next to railroad tracks
and traffic. 6 stories sounds like it might be better-suited to a city area, not a suburb.
Mahwah Resident
4:16 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
Yea angie, keep people from moving to your town cause they have kids. Whats next stopping people from moving to your town because they might shop at the already over crowded interstate plaza. Great logic
Pete Malvasi
7:51 pm on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Hi Mahwah resident. There is a near 40 percent difference in taxes from Mahwah to ramsey and that's almost entirely due to the school budget here. Taxes in Ramsey are really at break neck level now and a complex like this could actually force the building of a mew school and more teachers. If you look at California this is exactly why they have the problems they have - over development. And Ramsey btw has the best low income housing record around here - including Mahwahs. So we are maxed out friend. Truly.
Annie Oakley
6:37 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
I'm interested in hearing more; but hoping this might bring our taxes down.
Macy
7:15 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
There might be a few kids but the vast majority will be working people single and couples. I dont think families will be willing to pay that high a rent for an apartment. And, that would be an absolutly perfect place for a building like that. I would only hope they would lower the rent and possibly add a few low income units to help with the towns COAH requirements. We are comming to a time when people cant afford a house or even want to buy one, so apartments would be asset.
Angie Kelly
8:04 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
Mahwah resident....I'm guessing you have no kids in school, because if you did, you would understand my "logic"!
we already have many single family homes being built right now that will be all families....bottom line is our schools are overcrowded period....it can not handle what it has now....DO YOU HEAR ME....there is no room for desks! there is ZERO space for more bodies... the desks are blocking the doorways in some of the HS classrooms....there isn't room on the lunch tables for another body! what "logic" don't you understand!
If the town is ready to put additions on the schools then they can build 191 unit housing! We also have NO firetruck for a 6 story building....so for this to happen we need a new fire-truck and a place to put that truck! Why don't you worry about Mahwah and I'll worry about where I live!
James
9:54 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
what is happening with ramsey lumber is another good question
Andy
8:33 am on Sunday, December 23, 2012
Class sizes have been going up because of budget cuts and teachers being let go. I sure hope that anybody that is against this project has voted for the Ramsey school budgets. Otherwise, you are not making a lot of sense. Lets see, a proven developer wants to spend millions of dollars for luxury housing on a barren piece of land across from a huge train station- and people still have problems with it. Amazing! I bet you want your taxes to go down too!
Angie Kelly
10:05 am on Sunday, December 23, 2012
why don't you ask the kids who can't move their elbows on their lunch table if its because of budget cuts and teachers being let go....NO teachers have been let go inRamsey...and If we could have 10 more teachers, there is no place to put them....there is NO ROOM...and with all the new business Ramsey has started in the last few years, our taxes still have not gone done....I should expect this will do it?? If the developer wants to build another school building and fire house, he is welcome to his apartments.
Pete Malvasi
7:52 pm on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
And teachers have been let go by the choice of the Union who wouldn't delay their 3 percent increases to save 10 jobs.
Andy
7:17 pm on Sunday, December 23, 2012
You are completely wrong if you think that no teachers have been let go of in the past five years. Find out your facts from the school district after break. In addition, I didn't say your taxes would go down- check my posting again. What I said is that you are probably the kind of person that opposes all development and then complains that you want your taxes reduced (and maybe votes against the school budget). We need to continue to develop our town to just maintain where we are. I think this will improve the town and attract more smart development. Where are you getting your information that there is NO ROOM? If that is the case, how come the school district and board haven't asked the Ramsey taxpayers to build more space? They sent out 1 letter saying they were concerned about the development (with no details), and people reflexively think that any development is wrong. Ridgewood is building apartments and Suffern has been trying to get apartments for years in their downtown area- they don't want to be stuck in the failed 20th century suburban model.
Pete Malvasi
7:55 pm on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Ridgewood is building apartments because they have to in order to help meet low income housing requirements. As opposed to that town and others around here Ramsey did all of its fair legal share of low income housing as well as battered women shelters and other similar places which typically are rejected in other towns. The developer should answer how much those rentals will go for if property taxes go up by certain percentage too.
Andy
8:02 pm on Sunday, December 23, 2012
Maybe the developer will contribute towards a new truck, firehouse, or school. Maybe this development isn't the right idea for Ramsey. What I am saying is that we shouldn't reflexively reject this development because of the usual scare tactics- traffic, school overcrowding. I think it would look nice, reflect nice on our town, and use the land wisely. We should aim to develop our land near the train stations into walkable communities and let people who want to stay in their single family homes enjoy them as well.
Angie Kelly
1:10 pm on Monday, December 24, 2012
do we have to use up every single bit of open space we have here in Ramsey? when is it enough? I'm not using "scare tactics"....i'm flat out REJECTING it.
I will absolutely consider selling if this gets approved.
Pete Malvasi
7:59 pm on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Angie - you and me both and many others. We are at the brink of affordable taxes now and for some over the top. Property taxes is Mahwah are way way lower than here because of a more favorable school to population ratio. It's that simple. Even with a bigger PD and other town resources Mahwah taxes are much lower because they don't have as many kids to the general population. This project could cause a new school, (and where would we build that? Remember the Dater School debate. There ain't no where else to build a new school.
Angie Kelly
5:48 pm on Wednesday, January 16, 2013
As I sat on Island ave. today for 20 minutes after picking my kids up from school trying to get home....the image of another few hundred cars on Island trying to do the same was actually frightening.....