W. Front St. project must provide more COAH units
Variances for 27 units approved; site-plan approval now sought
BY LAYLI WHYTE
Staff Writer

Architect's rendering of Riverview Terrace.

RED BANK - By agreeing to add an additional affordable residential unit and recreational space on the roof, a condominium development for West Front Street gained variance approval from the borough Zoning Board last week.

The 27-unit residential development, Riverview Terrace, originally called for 24 market-rate units and three affordable units, but some members of the board said that they wanted the project to have more affordable housing.

"I think it's a beautiful project," said board Chairwoman Lauren Nicosia. "It will help relieve the traffic on Front Street. I would like to see more affordable housing in that project. With such a pretty project, it would be nice to see more affordable housing in there."

The project is proposed for the current site of a nursing home owned by Meridian Health Systems at 55 W. Front St., across the street from Riverside Gardens Park.

The proposed project would require three "d" variances, including one for use not permitted in the zone, increased floor area ratio (FAR), and the number of stories.

Multifamily dwellings are not permitted at street level in the CCD-2 zone, and the project calls for apartments on the ground floor.

The maximum number of stories permitted in the zone is three, which is the number of stories that exist at the nursing home. The project calls for four stories.

The application for the project has been bifurcated, with the bulk and "d" variances being heard first. Now that approval has been granted for those variances, the applicant, West Front Street Partners, will seek site plan approval at a separate hearing.

Peter S. Falvo, attorney for the project, said the borough ordinance follows the regulations set by New Jersey's Council on Affordable Housing (COAH), which states that one affordable housing unit must be constructed for every eight market-rate units built, and the project follows the borough ordinance.

"If you're looking for a density bonus," said Falvo, "there is no density requirement in the zone. I think my clients are in the position to contribute to the affordable housing fund."

An Affordable Housing Trust Fund was created by the borough, in line with COAH regulations. For projects that create fewer than eight units, the developer must pay a percentage of the cost of an affordable unit, rather than building the affordable housing.

"It's not in our jurisdiction to approve off-site affordable housing," said board member Thomas Williams. "That fund is for projects under eight units. If the architect can find room for another affordable unit, as well as recreation space on the roof, I will have no problem voting to approve it."

Board member Karen Waldman agreed.

"I think the project is beautiful," she said, "but I would also like to see more affordable housing."

Falvo said that if the additional affordable units would be a condition of approval by the board, his clients would be willing to make one of the market-rate units an affordable housing unit, adding that people who buy the market-rate units tend to absorb the cost of the affordable units.

Falvo also said that if the roof was used as recreation space as requested by the board, it would mean an increased floor area ratio (FAR). The project already exceeded that limit due to its underground parking garage, as well as the increased building height.

Williams and Waldman both said that they would be willing to vote in favor of the project, including the increased FAR and height, as long as the applicant was willing to meet the conditions of more affordable housing and recreational space on the roof.

The permitted FAR in the CCD-2 zone, where the project will be located, is 2.25. The project, including the garage, but not including the rooftop recreational area is 2.43.

"The applicant gets penalized for providing underground parking," said Falvo. "If you were to subtract the parking garage, the floor-area ratio would only be 1.73."

The height of the building would be 50 feet, and the original plan called for a 3-foot parapet. With the board calling for recreational space on the rooftop, the parapet will have to be increased an additional 2 feet or more for safety reasons, bringing the building height to 55 feet or more.