Copied from CBR Facebook page:Can this town handle 50 units an acre?
We need more members of the public to attend this meeting tomorrow night at RHS.(Sept 16, 7:30pm) There are only a few meetings left before the planning board comes to a decision on higher density housing in Ridgewood. Can this town handle 50 units an acre? What happens next? Will more developers seek the same zoning benefits? Will our town have to grant those requests or else fall victim to “spot zoning” claims and expensive litigation brought on by other land owners seeking the same density increases? Once this new zone is created, there is no turning back. 50 units an acre that cover 10 acres of our town. Our planning board needs to proceed cautiously and settle on a number that makes sense. This is what planning boards do. Planning Boards plan for communities and amend master plans to ensure a better quality of life for the residents. At what number should the density increase, in order to stimulate development, yet still compliment existing structures and not fundamentally change the character of this town? This whole process is like a walk on a tight rope. The answer lies in a delicate balance. We are hopeful that our planning board finds that balance and does not fall. Please come tomorrow night.
What if each unit brings one child to the Village?
50 kids at a cost of $14,000 each. What are the taxes to be generated for each unit? Will they cover their costs to the Village?
How much will the units cost? If I am moving from a 1 bedroom in NYC these units could be very attractive for my family. Good schools, safe downtown and an easy commute.
We need to answer cost and quality of life questions.
What if they bring 2 kids each, what if they are young professionals with no kids who are interested in building their career’s, or……….. what if they are long time Ridgewood residents who are empty nesters looking to downsize ?
I used to live in the apartments on Oak street. We were the only ones without kids. …..This development will bring in kids.
These developers have failed th outline these important issues. The cost of each studio, one and two bedroom unit. How many parking spots for each of those units? How much will they be offered for? They must have an idea, they would not be building if they did not know how much they were going to sell them for amd how many millions in profit they can expect.
What are the estimated taxes for each type of unit? Will there be age or income restrictions?
They may make money for the developer but that is not in the best interest of the town.
#4 the developers have brought forth ALL of the information you requested and more to both the Planning Board and in open forums held in various locations around town which were intended to inform the public and answer any questions or address concerns. To the point of the number of kids that will likely reside in the various apartments the developers presented the town with a ton of relevant data that addresses this question.
If they are using the Rutger’s study for their estimate of children their information would be greatly flawed. What young couple wouldn’t want to come to the Village for the excellent schools? Every second and third bedroom represents a child or two which means a student or two. And I haven’t heard mention of the subject, but will the developers be seeking full or partial tax abatements for the new units?
#4. If you have the information or a link to it please share.
I should not need to go to meetings each week to keep up with the developers. Look at Valley. They were able to keep it going for several years. They just wanted to wear us down. The developers have to go to meetings as a cost of doing business. It is their job. I already have a job – and a family.
I do not want the developer’s dog and pony show. I want the facts. Where are they?
#4 –what they presented was pretty bogus to those of us listening. One standard was whether people would children would move into the apartments if there was only limited green grass space. How stupid. If someone is moving to town for the schools, are they really going to count the number of grass blades first??
At other times the developers have conceded they don’t know the answer to the effect on things like the town’s infrastructure — so they have offered to put some money in escrow. No one knows the ultimate cost, however, so the escrow off is a hallow charade.
So, no, number 4, whatever ever public relations firm you belong to, they have not given all the information.
https://downtownridgewood.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/RidgewodRumorVsReality.pdf
The enclave:
2 Bedrooms / 2 Baths
1000 sq. ft.
Monthly rent: Monthly rent: $3000
#1 is so right! There has been no discussion about cost or quality of life. Both of these topics have been absent from all conversations.
Just like Valley, they (developers) will tell you ANYTHING to get it built.
From the document referenced by #9:
Ten Reasons to Welcome The Master Plan Amendment (With questions and rebuttals)
•Additional housing choices will retain residents who outgrow their homes (But your study says that owning a $550,000 house costs about the same. Is this place for families that are downsizing or upsizing?)
•The proposed developments create lesser traffic than any other development option (Please cite specific references and back your claim up with actual data)
•Minimal additional school children (Really? I believe that this comes from yet another less-than-believable “study” funded by the applicant. Please we all just sat through 7 years of Valley “studies” and we’ve kind of had it)
•Height and mass would be the same if commercial use (But commercial buildings don’t house as many people with cars and school children as your proposed building does.)
•Parking self-sufficient (Based upon how many cars per unit and how many cars per resident? If there are no kids in your building there will be more grownups with cars. Pick one.)
•No requirement of town services (Great – then you’ll agree put down a sizable deposit against which the town can draw if you’re wrong?)
•Contributions to traffic improvement (Isn’t this from that other less-than-believable study that said that traffic will improve if we allow this building to be built?)
•$1.5 million annual net fiscal benefits to school budget and general budget (Seems light. I’d like to see the math here)
•Planned parking structure will ease clog (How does parking ease whatever “clog” is?)
•Resolves affordable housing threat (Sorry, you don’t get this one both ways either. Affordable housing will draw families with school age kids.)
•Solidifies land use in the town with minimal yield (Really? How?)
Why aren’t our elected officials asking these questions?
It costs me less than that to own a 4br home in the Ridge school area with a 15 yr 5% mortage.
You’d have to be a moron to pay 3k for rent.
Why would someone leave a Manhattan 1 bedroom for a Ridgewood 1 bedroom? It would add an hour commute, Manhattan is just as safe, and the public schools in Manhattan are, in many cases, better. The reality is different from your view.