Posted on

Housing proposal draws protest in Ho-Ho-Kus

502-1300

www.charliesballparks.com

Housing proposal draws protest in Ho-Ho-Kus

JUNE 14, 2014    LAST UPDATED: SATURDAY, JUNE 14, 2014, 1:21 AM
BY CHRIS HARRIS
STAFF WRITER
THE RECORD

HO-HO-KUS — Residents opposed to a proposal to subdivide nearly four acres of mostly wooded land into 11 single-home plots questioned whether the project will cause flooding in their neighborhood.

The residents spoke at Thursday night’s Planning Board hearing on the planned project, known as the Hollows at Ho-Ho-Kus. Nine couples living around the proposed subdivision have hired Ho-Ho-Kus attorney Robert Inglima to represent them before the board.

The parcel — site of a large single-family house and a number of accessory structures — is located at West Saddle River Road and Hollywood Avenue, extending to Van Dyke Drive.

Those opposed to the project argue approving the subdivision would fundamentally change the character of the neighborhood.

They further predict the project will have a negative impact on natural drainage throughout the surrounding neighborhood.

Many of the residents, who directed questions at the developer’s engineer and planner, Mark Palus, were concerned about water runoff and groundwater recharge, and whether the 22 seepage pits called for in the plans will suffice.

Both Palus and Bruce Whitaker, an attorney representing the applicants, contend the project will improve drainage in the area, and not overburden the borough’s sewage and water systems.

– See more at: https://www.northjersey.com/news/housing-proposal-draws-protest-1.1035318#sthash.0dJREsno.dpuf

12 thoughts on “Housing proposal draws protest in Ho-Ho-Kus

  1. Yet another group of citizens banding together and hiring a lawyer. Could the people elected/appointed to represent the people please do it?

  2. These citizens want to stop a property owner from building what is allowed under the law.
    No variances required.
    He pays taxes so they can enjoy his woods.

  3. #2 There seems to be more to this. If what the owner wants is “allowed under the law” and not seeking variances, why is he an applicant before the Planning Board?


  4. Anonymous:

    #2 There seems to be more to this. If what the owner wants is “allowed under the law” and not seeking variances, why is he an applicant before the Planning Board?

    Because he wants to skip the expense of installing sidewalks (per the article).
    The property owner has obviously been paying property taxes all these years, and without dwellings built, most likely NOT using municipal services such as schools, police etc, effectively subsidizing his whining abutters.
    The property owner has the right to build the proposed # of houses within the current zoning laws without any committee reviews.

  5. that sounds a bit high to build that many homes on only 4 acres . I say only 3 more and leave and rebuild the old home.


  6. Anonymous:

    that sounds a bit high to build that many homes on only 4 acres . I say only 3 more and leave and rebuild the old home.

    If the zoning allows 11 without a variance, its going to be 11 homes.
    Why would a developer cave to your suggestion?
    Its about economics.
    He’s allowed to make the profit allowed under the current zoning.
    I’m sure if the loudmouth neighbors push hard enough, they will learn what a ‘builder’s remedy’ lawsuit is all about, and when 40 units of ‘affordable housing’ get built in their backyard, they will be wishing they shut their mouths and accepted what the zoning allows without trying to jerk someone around.
    I’d like to know where in Hohokus affordable housing exists?

  7. “Because he wants to skip the expense of installing sidewalks (per the article).”
    “The property owner has the right to build the proposed # of houses within the current zoning laws without any committee reviews.”
    So if I understand correctly, the owner and developer opened themselves up to this “commitee review” by asking permission to not build the required sidewalks.
    Okay, maybe that is a waiver not a variance, but it sure smells like the same kind of thing to me. They should of just figured on putting in sidewalks like everyone else has to do with new construction there.
    It doesn’t much matter if the current owner just bought the property or has owned it for a bunch of years, unless he is claiming to be grandfathered in, which he isn’t. You don’t get special planning treatment because you chose to buy land and not develop it, “subsidizing” the rest of the town as you put it.

  8. Just wait until these residents find out that Valley Hospital’s construction manager has designated the Hollywood Avenue exit as the primary truck route for all northbound trucks heading up Rt 17. Did anyone tell them that they could have 50 trucks per day making a u turn in their area too?


  9. Anonymous:

    You don’t get special planning treatment because you chose to buy land and not develop it, “subsidizing” the rest of the town as you put it.

    Whoever has been paying taxes on vacant buildable land has most certainly subsidized those who use the schools and other municipal services.
    Do the squirrels and raccoons attend the school?
    Developer should just put in the sidewalks and build what zoning allows.
    If loudmouths get too loud, go for builder’s remedy, put in 40 units of affordable condos and 80 units of market rate condos. Make some big bucks.


  10. xyz:

    Just wait until these residents find out that Valley Hospital’s construction manager has designated the Hollywood Avenue exit as the primary truck route for all northbound trucks heading up Rt 17. Did anyone tell them that they could have 50 trucks per day making a u turn in their area too?

    The last time I checked it was a public road so anyone who wants to use it may.

    1. perhaps you should tell that to the neighbors

  11. If in fact its accurate that the proposed truck route for Northbound trucks goes north past linwood into hohokus, then perhaps you have a point, especially since there is no reason to put that traffic into another town except to appease residents who live on linwood, the direct route from rt 17.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *