Different views offered on Ridgewood planner’s housing estimate
NOVEMBER 14, 2014 LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2014, 12:31 AM
BY LAURA HERZOG
STAFF WRITER |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS
Print
PAGES: 1 2 > DISPLAY ON ONE PAGE
One figure quoted briefly at last week’s Planning Board hearing has attendees talking.
That figure is the “500-700 units” that, as the village planner noted in response to a resident’s question last Monday, could be built in Ridgewood if the currently proposed amendment to allow high-density multifamily housing in the Central Business District is approved and fully “built out” – i.e. a possible snapshot of how the amendment under consideration might affect the village in a “worst-case” scenario.
Village Planner Blais Brancheau noted that this number would require buildings comprising at least an acre of land to be torn down, and he believed the figure was unlikely. Members of Citizens for a Better Ridgewood (CBR), however, had serious concerns about that figure, which they believe is low.
The citizens action group has long been asking the village to reassess a density increase that is currently being deliberated – from 12 units per acre to 40-50 units per acre – and, through study and master plan reexamination, find a lower maximum density for new proposed apartments that might better suit Ridgewood.
On Tuesday, CBR trustee Amy Bourque said that the organization considers Brancheau’s cited estimate a “conservative number.”
https://www.northjersey.com/news/differing-views-on-estimate-offered-1.1133512
I find it interesting the both the Village Planner and the developers used the terms “worst case” and “doomsday” with regard to the 700 apartment scenario. Of course they quickly added that that scenario was “unlikely”.
Isn’t it the job of the Planner and ultimately our Mayor and Council to take “worst case” and “doomsday” scenarios completely off the table regardless of how “unlikely” it is that they come about? Who is running the show here?
It’s time for our leaders to lead. See Upper Saddle River as an example.
Why doesn’t the article mention that Ron Simoncini is the paid Public Relations firm advocating on behalf of the developer? To portray him as a resident is disingenuous at best (and he’ll probably move next year when his youngest graduates RHS).
This is just a way for the developers to get their foot in the door with the help of Big Al the Developers Friend.
#2 The story says “…was later questioned by resident Ron Simoncini, a spokesperson for the developer of the proposed 52-unit Enclave development…”
Is that what you mean by the article not mentioning he’s working for a developer?
https://www.northjersey.com/opinion/opinion-letters-to-the-editor/letter-planner-s-report-on-multifamily-housing-misses-the-point-1.1133373