Babylon planning board closes hearing on proposed 24‑unit senior complex on Cedar Road; decision reserved

The Town of Babylon Planning Board on Aug. 11 closed the public hearing and reserved decision on an application by G and R Building Corp. to change the zoning of a 1.37‑acre parcel on the south side of Cedar Road to Senior Citizen Multiple Residence (SCMR) for four two‑story buildings totaling 24 one‑bedroom units.

The proposal, presented by attorney Nicole Blanda of Bizzell Blanda & Visconti, calls for four two‑story buildings (Buildings A–D) with a total of 24 one‑bedroom apartments and associated site work on a lot with about 177 feet of frontage on Cedar Road. The developer proposes a 20% affordable component (five units). Blanda told the board the project will provide 50 parking spaces, including four handicap‑accessible spaces, which the applicant said is about 10 spaces more than the town code requires. The site plan shows a community/recreation area in Building D, a library on the first floor, a fitness area on the second, exterior recreation space, and an on‑site turning diagram for refuse and emergency vehicles.

A traffic study by Rebecca Goldberg of IMEG, submitted to address the town traffic safety consultant’s questions, found only small vehicle trip increases associated with the development. Goldberg said traffic counts were taken during typical weekday peak hours (7–9 a.m. and 4–6 p.m.) and Saturday midday (11 a.m.–2 p.m.) and modeled using the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation procedures. She summarized the study’s results as roughly five trips in the morning peak hour, six in the evening peak hour and nine in the Saturday midday peak, with net increases of about four to five trips per peak hour compared with as‑of‑right uses. The study concluded there would be no level‑of‑service changes at the nearby intersection and only minimal delay changes. Goldberg also noted the applicant will provide a 7‑foot sidewalk along the frontage and that a town traffic safety reviewer issued a memo (June 18) agreeing with the study’s results.

Goldberg described one recommended condition from the planning memorandum (condition 12): a contribution to a fund for installation and maintenance of emergency‑vehicle optical preemption on nearby traffic signals, which she said is intended to "reduce emergency response delay." She also said parking dimensions and drive‑aisle width on the plan meet or exceed town standards.

Residents who spoke at the hearing raised notice, parking, safety and enforcement concerns about the existing adjacent property and the proposed project. Anthony Milling of 119 Cedar Road, who said he has lived on Cedar Road since 1975, told the board that the adjacent complex billed as "senior" contains non‑seniors and children, generates parking on the street, and has ongoing public‑safety problems at the dead end. "Been a resident for 52 years," Milling said, and described traffic, drug and prostitution activity near the dead end. Ruth Pierre, also of 119 Cedar Road, told the board she and other neighbors did not receive mailed notice of the hearing and asked how residents can submit information for the record. Lorraine Ricks Fields of 109 Cedar Road described repeated on‑site incidents she said impede ambulance and refuse access and said the current complex’s amenities and upkeep do not match the property’s advertised age‑restricted status.

Planning staff and the applicant responded that notices are mailed to property owners within a 200‑foot radius of the subject parcel as required by town code and that the planning department posts a sign at the site; staff said neighbors may request the mailing list and inspect application materials in the planning office. Matt Esposito, identified at the hearing as the town’s top planner, said the planning board reviews the site plan and that the Town Board — the elected supervisor and council members — will make any decision on a change of zone.

The applicant acknowledged a small number of variances will be required for setbacks and an accessory RPZ structure, and said the project does not require a density or parking variance. Blanda said unit sizes vary and the plan will include an internal covenant preventing a den from being converted to a second bedroom by requiring an opening greater than four feet and that the den lacks a closet. She said each unit will have a washer‑dryer, a full bath and a powder room; she stated the applicant "consent[s] to all the covenants and conditions" listed in the planning memo.

After public comment and questions for the applicant’s engineer and traffic consultant, the board voted to close the public hearing and reserve decision so members and staff can review the site plan comments, traffic review, and the written material neighbors may submit. The board chair read town planning contact details into the record and said application documents and plans are available for inspection at the planning office between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. or by phone or email; the record will remain open for written comments. The town board will separately consider the requested change of zone.

Votes at a glance: the board moved to close the public hearing and reserve decision; the motion was made from the dais (mover identified as "Frank") and seconded by Tamika, and the chair declared the motion carried.