Planning board grants concept approval for senior housing PDD at 33–45 Forest Ferry Road

The Town Planning Board voted to grant concept approval for a planned development district at 33–45 Forest Ferry Road that would add four senior apartment buildings containing 38 new units and a community room, with 16 garage parking spaces. The board heard the project as its sole agenda item and emphasized that concept approval is nonbinding and that detailed standards and conditions will be set in PDD legislation and reviewed at subsequent hearings.

Jamie Easton, the civil engineer on the project for EP Land, told the board the next steps are a recommended (nonbinding) vote to the town board, a town-board public hearing and, if the PDD is approved, adoption of a local law specific to the parcel. "The first step after, basically, this board takes a vote... it's technically called a nonbinding vote. It's a recommendation, basically, to the town board," Easton said. He described the concept submission as showing building elevations, general grading and utilities but noted landscaping, lighting and final architecture will be addressed later in site‑plan review.

Easton said the submission proposes 38 additional units on a parcel that currently holds roughly 100 units overall; code density and prior approvals were discussed as part of the justification for the PDD. He also described neighbor mitigation measures including removal of dead trees, a 100‑foot buffer, installation of a 6‑foot fence with an evergreen hedgerow for screening and provision of town water and sewer hookups to an adjacent lot. "We are actually going to bury that [fiber optic line] for them," Easton said, describing an effort to reduce impacts on the nearest neighbor.

Board members pressed for clarity about what elements should be set in the PDD legislation rather than left for later review. One member urged that architectural standards, public‑benefit commitments such as a mid‑block crossing or sidewalks, and clear landscaping requirements be drafted early so the town board and planning staff can evaluate them consistently. The board noted architectural concerns voiced during the meeting about rear elevations, and Easton said he would look at ways to improve the backs of the two‑story buildings.

The board moved and approved concept acceptance by voice vote; the transcript records members answering "aye" and no opposed voices. The board instructed staff and the applicant to draft PDD legislation that enumerates required design elements and public‑benefit commitments; the project will return to the Planning Board during the PDD and final site‑plan processes.