The developer of a 5.63-acre property abutting Eagle Rock Reservation in Montclair is considering seven town homes for the land. The new plans come after the township raised concern about a prior design for eight residences.
The developer of 14 Undercliff and 172 Lloyd roads presented its latest iteration of the plans for “Lloyd Estate” to the Planning Board for informal review on Monday. An earlier plan — now scrapped — called for 60,000 square foot mega mansion that would have been larger than the White House. It followed the demolition of two homes on the site in 2019.
J. Michael Petry, an architect for Lloyd Estate, said the two lots comprise 3.08 acres and 2.55 acres, with an existing single-family home located to the north of the property, Petry said. Roads take up about half an acre of the land, Petry said.
What’s In Seven Lots?
Of the seven lots proposed, he said, two lots front Undercliff Road. The plans call for a new road to replace an existing driveway and cut diagonally across the site, branching off onto five more lots, Petry said.
“The lots vary in size from 24,686 square feet to 39,585 square feet,” Petry said. “They’re substantially larger than the 20,000 square foot requirement. But that is primarily driven by lot width and lot depth requirements.”
Most of the lots are 30,000 square feet (.69 acres) or larger, he said. Two of the lots would use a shared driveway from a cul-de-sac, Petry said.
“We’d like to come in with a development that makes sense for this property and for this town at this location,” he told the board. “These aren’t going to be little lots in any way shape or manner. These are going to be good-sized lots.”
No On-Site Affordable Housing
The plans do not call for affordable housing on the site. Janice Talley, the township’s director of planning and community development, said the developer would instead pay into the town’s affordable housing fund.
“Because this doesn’t meet the minimum density of our affordable housing ordinance, it doesn’t apply. You’d be paying a fee – a development fee,” Talley told the developer. That fee would be 1.5% of the assessed value of each home, she said.
Tax records show the entity 14 Undercliff Road LLC purchased the lot on Undercliff Road for a market value of $3.88 million in 2018. The developer then purchased the lot on Lloyd Road for $3.4 million, records show.
About the Developer
State Treasury Department records list the owner of a combined entity – Undercliff Lloyd LLC – as GoldCherryHoldings, with an address in Ridgewood. A website for the real estate developer says GoldCherryHoldings has over 20 years of experience in development and property management.
Officials did not discuss a date for presentation of a formal application. Montclair Local reached out to the developer’s attorney, Alan Trembulak, for comment on that point Wednesday.
Addressing the board, Trembulak had cited the state law that allows for boards to informally review plans.
Review ‘Non-Binding’
“It’s essentially an informal non-binding discussion regarding what we’re going to present this evening. And our hope is to try to get some sense from the board as to the viability of what’s being proposed or perhaps what the board would like to see,” Trembulak said.
A portion of the discussion centered around whether the proposed road should be a public or private street. The property owners would be responsible for maintaining a private road, officials said.
“It does seem like more folks are favorable to the private road aspect more than the public road,” said Board Chairman Keith Brodock.
Email reporter Matt Kadosh at matt@montclairlocal.news
My problem with this meeting is I didn’t like the leaning towards a private road. If the fire department want public roads to be 28 feet wide, would it not be the safest thing to make this a public road, instead of using the use of a private road in order to make the road more narrow? Not getting it. I would like to see the fire department issue something in writing about that. You know, before a fire burns down the reservation.
Also disappointed when a council person liaison said, “why don’t you build it the way you think best, and we will just give you the variances.”. What was that all about? I thought the board and the two council liaison people are there to protect the township, not give the shop to the developer. Truly bizarre.
Monty: This was a courtesy review, so the comment about “why don’t you build it the way you think best” was taken out of context. What the board was suggesting is that the developer propose what they want to actually build, and give the reasoning to support the variances as a best way to move forward. That makes sense in this context, as there are multiple ways to approach this subdivision, and the “as of right” concept seemed to be riddled with problems, despite being something the Developer could do with no variances.
As for the private road, we have many of them in Montclair. It’s a cost benefit analysis that needs to be done here. If the developer meets the criteria for a public road, the township has to maintain that road in perpetuity. The taxes generated from the lots are the justification for that, but given the state of our municipal economy, a private road may be better for the township as the project would likely generate the same taxes and the property owners would bear the future burdens of the maintenance to the road. Safety is the only reason I can think of to not implement a private road, and I’m sure the MFD will weigh in on that front. The homes that were previously there had VERY long private driveways that were 8-10 feet wide, so while this would be adding more homes to the lot, it wouldn’t be something that made it harder for the MFD to service than what was previously there you’d think.
7 houses with RE taxes most likely north of 30K and kids probably going to private school…mmm…sounds like a financial win for the town and a private road would be a cherry on top. What’s the problem?