In a marathon Jan. 22 Zoning Board meeting that lasted about four hours, advocates and opponents of the 13-story Meridia Le Boulevard high-rise apartment complex debated its potential impact. It was the first of two public hearings on the project, which has been proposed for Boulevard East.
The Capadagli Property Company is asking for 20 significant use variances from the city for height, residential density, and other factors, which must be granted by the Zoning Board for the project to move ahead. The building would house 157 units and would create 160 off-street parking spaces. The site at 5509-15 Boulevard East is zoned for a maximum of three stories and is occupied by a former auto repair store.
Opponents argued that the neighborhood is already too congested, and that a high-rise would add more cars to an area already short of parking spaces. Joshua Breakstone, a spokesman for Concerned Citizens for the Preservation of Quality of Life Along the Palisades, said Capadagli’s proposal violates several town zoning codes, would block views of the New York skyline, and limit sunlight.
Other opponents said the building would overwhelm mass transit, arguing that the buses are already overcrowded and that the developer misled the board on the availability of mass transit, citing the availability of bus routes that are actually more than a mile away from the proposed site.
The building would include a giant red “M” that would remain illuminated day and night, which neighbors said would intrude on their properties.
“After months of listening to what the developer plans, this plan borders on the absurd,” said resident Lena Ryerson. “The sign is something more suited to the Las Vegas Strip than a property zoned for a three story building.”
Clashing attorneys
Supported by their own attorney and development expert, as many as 50 opponents to the project spent more than four hours trying to derail the project. In legal bickering as intense at times as a criminal trial, the attorney representing the developer attempted to undermine the alleged facts presented by opponents.
“The sign is something more suited to the Las Vegas Strip than a property zoned for a three story building.” – Lena Ryerson.
____________
Alvaro Alonso, the attorney representing Capadagli Properties, disputed many of the claims made by opponents, often arguing that the residents did not have the expertise to validate their objections. He questioned the validity of a study conducted by Breakstone on building setbacks in the neighborhood, and grilled other residents who made observations about the impact on the neighborhood.
Legal issues delayed the project last year
Approval for Meridia Le Boulevard was temporarily halted last year under threat of a lawsuit when Kantowitz claimed two of the members of the board had conflicts of interest and should not have voted on the project.
Board members Armando Alvarez, who serves as a commissioner for the town’s parking authority, and Julio Garcia, who serves on the Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC) Board, were supposedly prohibited under a state law that said no zoning board member “may hold any elective office or position under the municipality.”
The Zoning Board restarted the approval process late last year, only to find itself short of the necessary number of voting members to make a quorum. With the appointment of Almer Martin and Muhammad Elnaktoud at the Jan. 22 meeting, this issue was resolved.
There were questions raised about a deal between the Parking Authority and the developer over parking spaces at another Capadagli building on Park Avenue. But this issue became moot when the city and parking authority dissolved the deal. City and Parking Authority officials when contacted said the developer had failed to meet the timeline as required under the agreement so the deal was canceled.
Spot zoning not allowed
Opponents also cited the city’s newly-revised Master Plan in their argument against giving the variances. The city revived a Master Plan late last year that had stronger language in support of open space and less dense development.
Some critics of the plan predicted developers will challenge some of these provisions as “spot zoning,” or singling out a particular parcel for rules that might not apply elsewhere. City officials said spot zoning could leave the city open to legal challenge.
Is politics involved?
Opponents also alluded to possible political intrigue between Mayor Felix Roque and Capadagli.
They revived a charge made by political opponents of Mayor Roque last year that Capadagli is allegedly involved in a political action committee expected to dedicate funds to the reelection of the mayor this year. Several members of the Zoning Board who are to vote on Capadagli’s project were appointed by Roque.
On the other hand, city officials who asked not to be named said the developer’s track record with the city has been relatively poor, and said Capadagli’s previous project on Park Avenue has been a headache for the Roque Administration.
While opponents of the Boulevard East project tried to use the Park Avenue project as an argument against approval, Alonso tried to limit these comments, arguing they were not relevant to the approval of the proposal now before the board.
Capadagli’s building on Park Avenue has been plagued by problems that led to fines imposed on the developer by the city, and work stoppages.
Alonso claimed these were minor problems typical of most new projects. But city officials when contacted after the meeting said the problems were much more serious and some still have not been resolved.
They said the original project has yet to get its final certificate of occupancy. This means that it has yet to fully comply with the city’s requirements. The Park Avenue building is operating on its fourth temporary Certificate of Occupancy.
Zoning Board Chairman Kenneth Blane seemed to side with the developer on this issue, but said the board would weight other arguments as it sees fit.
To be continued
Partly because of the debate between conflicting lawyers and partly because many of those who spoke went over the time allotted, only about half of those who wanted to speak got a chance. So the Zoning Board voted to continue the public hearing on March 26.
Al Sullivan may be reached at asullivan@hudsonreporter.com.