BY MICHAEL OLOHAN
OF PASCACK PRESS
PARK RIDGE, N.J.—Here’s a primer on Tuesday, Jan. 15’s first Zoning Board of Adjustment hearing on an application by Hornrock Properties to build an access road through less than an acre of land in Park Ridge to its proposed 185-unit multifamily development in Montvale.
Hornrock is seeking concurrent approval from Montvale’s Joint Planning Board for the proposed 185-unit development— which provides 37 affordable housing units as part of Montvale’s already approved affordable housing plan.
WHO: Hornrock Properties (applicant).
WHAT: Application (including three variances) to construct an access road in Park Ridge to a planned 185-unit multifamily development in Montvale (not yet approved there, either). Variances requested include a use variance to permit driveway use on the Park Ridge property; a bulk variance to permit less than required number of parking spaces to support the existing office building; and other variances, waivers or exceptions that may be required.
WHEN: Jan.15, 8 p.m. at Park Ridge Borough Hall, 53 Park Ave., Park Ridge
WHERE: Park Ridge Borough Hall (Council Chambers).
WHY: Proposed access road is critical for access to future site of 185-unit multifamily Montvale development, which includes 20 percent, or 37 affordable housing units—part of Montvale’s already settled affordable housing plan through 2025.
BACKGROUND: Park Ridge contests Hornrock’s intervention in its affordable housing settlement as Hornrock wages a legal battle with Park Ridge. In 2015, Hornrock requested the borough rezone the property to allow for 555 residential units on the Park Ridge-portion of the former Sony Electronics property.
Park Ridge has legally fought Hornrock’s development plans for years and prefers to put affordable units downtown. Its affordable housing plan recommends limited housing development on its Sony site, and Hornock is now contesting the Park Ridge affordable housing plan before Superior Court Judge Gregg Padovano.
As an intervenor in the affordable housing settlement, Hornrock contends the 29.85 acres of Sony’s former campus in Park Ridge can accommodate up to 1,000 housing units.
Park Ridge contends that due to environmental constraints, development is restricted there and better accommodated downtown, closer to transit, shopping and employment opportunities.
A case conference update is scheduled Feb. 15 before Padovano, including Hornrock and Fair Share Housing Center.
Hornrock argues that development of Park Ridge’s nearly 30-acre parcel with inclusionary housing—four market units to one affordable unit—will help Park Ridge satisfy its affordable housing obligations while Park Ridge contends it does not need multifamily housing on the site to satisfy its obligations. Hornrock purchased the former Sony property in 2015.
Both Hornrock attorney Richard J. Hoff (of Bisgaier Hoff) and Park Ridge special counsel Scott Reynolds spent much of a Dec. 18, 2018, case conference before Padovano arguing over legal interpretations of state law on civil rights, the poor current office space market, and possible reports, studies and testimony being sought between both as part of an ongoing “discovery process” for a likely future trial between Hornrock and Park Ridge.
Hoff said at the Dec. 18 hearing that “My goal is to get to trial” and Padovano said the trail discovery phase must conclude by this Feb. 15.
Hoff charged for three years the borough has repeatedly delayed by filing motions for draft documents and reports from Hornrock which have no bearing on whether Park Ridge’s affordable housing plan is ultimately deemed satisfactory.
Reynolds called Hoff’s charges “pure hyperbole” and said Park Ridge “is moving the case forward.” Reynolds said he needs to take four more depositions from certain Hornrock professional experts who may testify and Hoff said one expert testifying for Park Ridge, Joseph Burgis, would be deposed.
[MORE: GO IN DEPTH ON THIS ISSUE WITH PASCACK PRESS]
Hoff also informed Padovano then that Park Ridge “was actively seeking to undermine” Hornrock’s Montvale application for a 185-unit development by submitting a letter opposing the development from its borough attorney.
