Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors raise privacy and parking concerns about The Soho development at Fanwood council meeting
Summary
Multiple residents urged the council to enforce setback and parking rules, raised privacy concerns about balconies and window placement, and sought clarity on move-in timing and retail tenants for The Soho; staff pledged follow-up with property managers.
Residents pressed the council on Monday over design and operational details for a nearby apartment project referred to as The Soho, citing front-setback interpretations, guest parking, privacy from balconies and windows, and anticipated move-in logistics.
Carrie Morris told the council she found a potential typo in the CCE-zone language governing front setbacks and suggested the error could require the project to seek variances. "That seems like a major, major thing and that basically saves our neighborhood," she said, urging officials to re-examine the planning-record language.
Neighbors also raised privacy concerns. Yanik Salazar said he saw what looked like an upper-level balcony that could overlook yards and requested confirmation whether buffer trees would be installed to protect privacy. "If indeed that is a balcony, then there is no tree tall enough that's going to protect my privacy," Salazar said, asking whom to contact about move-in procedures and hours.
Council staff said they had received written feedback and would facilitate connections between residents and the building owner. Borough staff member Liz Jeffrey offered to coordinate a site walk and put concerned residents in touch with the owner to discuss move-in timing, parking expectations and ongoing management.
Speakers also noted design changes during the permitting process: the applicant reduced the apartment count from 62 to 58, removed a gazebo that had drawn noise concerns, and enclosed trash storage areas. Some residents urged stronger enforcement of guest-parking and RSIS guest-space requirements; others expressed broader objections to increased density and to the appearance and window placement of the proposed building.
Councilors said they would follow up: town staff will confirm whether setback language requires correction, provide details about approved parking and move-in rules, and coordinate outreach with the owner and police to manage deliveries and move-in-day traffic.
The council did not take an immediate action on the development during the meeting; residents were told staff and the planning board were reviewing the matter and would respond to the written issues raised.
