Resident Clarifies Critique on Montvale Planning

An architectural rendering of the proposed 185-unit Hornrock Properties development, including 37 affordable units, which are required as part of Montvale’s already approved affordable housing settlement. | Photo by Michael Olohan

To the editor:

In an April 29 article in Pascack Press, “[Montvale] Board Advances Preliminary Approval For 185 Units,” the author references that during the public comment period I indicated that “manipulation” occurred by the Montvale Planning Board. The article did not elaborate on this “manipulation.”  

As background, Montvale settled on approximately 80 units or less than six units per acre on the former A&P corporate property (19 acres). In contrast, Montvale settled on 185 apartment units or 26 units per acre on the Hornrock corporate property (7 acres) that straddles Woodcliff Lake and Park Ridge. 

The Hornrock density is more than quadrupled the density of the former A&P property.  According to Montvale, they indicated that a lower density was appropriate for the former A&P property because it was near the core of Montvale residences.  

However, Montvale officials seemed to refuse or care to acknowledge that more than quadrupling the density for the Hornrock property, which artificially increased its own affordable housing obligation, would also impact the core of Woodcliff Lake residences and Park Ridge.  I want to point out this egregious mistake by Montvale’s officials because of the detriment and negative impacts to the Tri-Borough.  

That brings me back to Montvale’s manipulation of its new ordinances to facilitate the overdevelopment of the Hornrock property. Good planning principles determine setbacks for the front, side, and rear property lines that will substantially determine the amount of buildable space.  

However, Montvale officials decided to inexplicably designate the rear property boundary that backs up to the Garden State Parkway as the front yard although access is not possible off the GSP and the proposed building isn’t facing in the direction of the front yard.  

In addition, Montvale designated the property boundary shared with Park Ridge with no setback, meaning the developer could build up to that property line. Ultimately, this no setback provided by Montvale, completely unheard of, was instrumental to allowing Hornrock to overdevelop their property. 

I understand that Mayor Ghassali and the Council decided that they wanted to settle in lieu of battling in court, but why throw out the rule of good planning principles to facilitate this overdevelopment that will cause significant harm to the good residences of Montvale, Woodcliff Lake and Park Ridge.

These are the “manipulations” that I spoke about at the Montvale Planning Board meeting that I would welcome a response from the Montvale mayor and council.

David O’Sullivan
Park Ridge Citizens For Responsible Development