August 1, 2012 THE VILLADOM TIMES I • Page 7 Wyckoff CHCC Vista plan sent back to drawing board by John Koster The Wyckoff Zoning Board of Adjustment asked the proponents of the Christian Health Care Center’s Vista project to take the plan back to the drawing board and return with a reduced plan that would fulfill the adult community role while being somewhat less intrusive to residential neighbors. The Wyckoff officials specifically asked for a list of changes they believe will make the Vista plan less objectionable to the concerted opposition it has aroused among neighbors. Board members want the size of the Vista adult community reduced by 25 percent, either by reducing the square footage of the 258 units or by reducing the number of townhouse units from 258 to 195. The “ultra-large” corner units would be the primary targets for size reduction. Board members also urged that the height requirement be reduced so that no structure would exceed 35 feet, which would eliminate the need for a height variance and could reduce concern from the neighbors about view obstruction. In addition, the board recommended that the entry fee for Vista be reduced to allow more people to gain access to the proposed housing. Vista aims to provide healthy seniors with a measure of independence close to medical and social services and housing for those who require more intensive care. More landscaping to screen the project from neighbors was also mentioned, as were bike paths or connecting trails to the main component buildings of the Christian Health Care Center, a 100-year-old facility for elder care located in Wyckoff’s Sicomac area. The board also asked for restrictions on cellular towers and satellite antennas without specific board approval. The case is expected to continue Oct. 1. While some objectors to the Vista project who spoke among themselves outside the meeting were somewhat mollified, the consensus was that the Vista project was still too big and too intrusive. Objectors have previously pointed out that since the Vista occupants would be people who are still largely or entirely self-sufficient, the project did not have the same “inherent benefits” as a home for the frail elderly who need constant care. Proponents claim the plan would be a benefit to Wyckoff as the development would bring in taxpayers who would not bring children to the school systems or contribute to any great degree to local traffic. Supporters also say the housing would allow long-term residents of Wyckoff and nearby communities to remain within a convenient distance of families, friends, and local houses of worship and shopping centers. Monopole (continued from page 3) “Consequently, the court cannot find any persuasive evidence in the record to support the board’s decision to deny the plaintiff’s variance application. The board’s decision is not founded on facts from the record. While the court comprehends the board’s sensitivity to the concerns of the objectors, the record clearly shows the minimal aesthetic impact. The board’s decision, therefore, must be set aside as arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable.”