Is hospital’s plan reasonable for Ridgewood?
MARCH 28, 2014 LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, MARCH 28, 2014, 12:32 AM
Is hospital’s plan reasonable for Ridgewood?
Linda McNamara
Your article “Planner OK with hospital’s proposal” (March 21, page A1) left the wrong impression with the casual reader.
One would have had to read the entire piece to know that the man hired by the Planning Board was charged only with assessing whether The Valley Hospital expansion proposal is reasonable. The question still remains, is it reasonable for Ridgewood?
Mr. May could only answer, “It’s not for me to say. I don’t look at the community, I look at the appropriateness of the facility.”
In my opinion, his testimony is rendered useless by his own words. He was hired by the Ridgewood Planning Board not by Any Town, U.S.A. No one is questioning Valley’s desire to modernize it’s facility. What is in question is the size of the expansion on a 15-acre lot in the middle of a residential neighborhood abutting a middle school.
As a homeowner who pays taxes, I am restricted to what I can build on my property. Valley pays no taxes and somehow we are willing to entertain the notion of changing our Master Plan, the existing hospital zoning and God knows what else to give Valley what it wants.
– See more at: https://www.northjersey.com/opinion/opinion-letters-to-the-editor/letter-is-hospital-s-plan-reasonable-for-ridgewood-1.753095#sthash.cufsNAoi.dpuf
It’s too big and it is unreasonable to expect residents to live in a demolition/construction zone for 10 years.
To sum it up for the residents of Ridgewood : You get to change the town’s Master Plan for an entity that pays nothing in taxes. You also get 7-10 years of big time construction in a residential neighborhood, which, by the way, also happens to be next to a school. Upon completion, you get stuck with a huge structure that really belongs in a city.
Although just having entertained the thought of doing all this to a town (village ?) this size over the last few years can only be described as “borderline nuts,” somehow the town has arrived at the point of possibly approving this absurdity. Very sad…
Neither The hospital nor Ms Price, nor Mrs Hauck, nor any other Valley supporter has been able to answer the one most basic question: How is the proposed Valley expansion good for Ridgewood?
One would think that after all these years of hearings, PR campaigns, “experts”, surveys and lawsuits that at least one person on the Valley side would have taken a crack at this one. The best that they’ve been able to offer so far (and it’s been weak case at that) is that the expansion won’t make things worse.
Answer this for me #3 – How is ANY addition to a home by a homeowner good for Ridgewood
I’m not #3, but MOST of the time an addition to a home will add value to that home, and, as a result, help the values of the homes in the neighborhood. Generally speaking, it does not hurt.
I wish all my neighbors would put additions on their homes.
The assessed value goes up.
They pay more in taxes (so I don’t have to!)
#4 Many additions to homes do not need variances – let alone have an impact on the Master Plan. And when a neighbor improves a home and pays more taxes my home value goes up.
Valley will not have a positive impact on home values and they do not pay taxes. The addition is only good for Valley, good for business.
Very good question #4! Every addition on every home in Ridgewood must conform to existing laws and ordinances. No single taxpayer (how much does Valley pay in taxes again?) gets to expand his or her home beyond what the the local laws and ordinances allow. For good reason. So I ask again, how is the Valley Hospital expansion good for Ridgewood? Answering that question with a question doesn’t count.
Why is the planning board doing the same thing all over again? The reason this is back in their court is that the council said this was not right for Ridgewood yet they have again refused to bring in a planner that would look at just this issue. This is a monumental waste of taxpayers money, and time.
#9 It’s been a waste of time and money especially in light of the fact that after yet another year of hearings Mrs. Price has given the Planning Board 2 choices – they can adopt the 2010 Master Plan Amendment that lets Valley do whatever they want or the 2013 Master Plan Amendment that lets Valley do whatever they want. Only the expert testimony – mostly paid for by Valley – can be considered. Public comment should be given no weight.
What do you suppose we pay Mrs. Price per hour for this wisdom?