Tag: high density housing

Posted on by — 1 Comment

Ridgewood’s Coming Battle With Forced Over-development

CBD high density housing

April 7,2018

the staff of the Ridgewood

Ridgewood NJ, Fair share housing is driving all the high density housing in Bergen County and the rest of the state ,destroying neighborhoods and communities in their wake. . Anyone who is saying I am progressive and I want to run for higher level office in NJ, and at the same time saying “I will oppose” high density development, is not being honest with voters. This and the “rainbow flag” is the only progressive cause where they can show their voting record in Ridgewood to gain a ticket for higher office in NJ. This is exactly with Harwin’s mentor Paul Aronsohn  did in 2008 and what a mess that made.

Fair Share Housing using the “Mount laurel Doctrine”  clams to be helping working families but instead seems to be the DEVEOPERS BEST FRIEND. Forced over development creates more demand for police, fire, schools, roads ,sewers ,electric and water. , Often over whelming the infrastructure of the target town.

The back ground ,the New Jersey Supreme Court, in Mount Laurel I (1975) and Mount Laurel II (1983), declared that municipal land use regulations that prevent affordable housing opportunities for the poor are unconstitutional and ordered all New Jersey municipalities to plan, zone for, and take affirmative actions to provide realistic opportunities for their “fair share” of the region’s need for affordable housing for low and moderate-income people. Peter J. O’Connor, founder and Executive Director of Fair Share Housing Center, was one of three attorneys who brought the original Mount Laurel litigation.

The Mount Laurel Doctrine, which prohibits economic discrimination against the poor by the state and municipalities in the exercise of their land use powers, was the first case of its type in the nation and is widely regarded as one of the most significant civil rights cases in the United States since Brown v. Board of Education (1954). The Mount Laurel Doctrine today is a cornerstone of land use courses in all of our nation’s law schools.

In 1985, the New Jersey Legislature, in direct response to the Mount Laurel decisions, enacted the Fair Housing Act, which created the Council on Affordable Housing (COAH) to assess the statewide need for affordable housing, allocate that need on a municipal fair share basis, and review and approve municipal housing plans aimed at implementing the local fair share obligation.

 The pressure will be on the Village of Ridgewood because Ridgewood is embarking on the development of a new Village Master Plan to replace the current, outdated document which is about 35 years old. A Master Plan encompasses all zoning laws and regulations that shaped the Village into the community it is today. From downtown development to the allowable property setbacks in everyone’s neighborhoods, the document is critical in maintaining the character of the Village. Our goal is to allow for smart development that doesn’t overwhelm streets and neighborhoods while supporting a vibrant and healthy Central Business District.

A new Village Master Plan document will guide Ridgewood’s development 40 plus years into the future making it critically important for trusted, experienced Council members to be active participants. Council members with a proven track record of protecting resident property values, Ridgewood neighborhoods, and the character of the Village we call home. Mayor Knudsen is the most experienced Council member in the area of Municipal Land Use making her participation important to the future of the Village. Experienced Council members with a comprehensive understanding of Municipal Land Use patterns, development and zoning, will serve the community best as we begin the exciting Master Plan process.

Imagine the Ridgewood Water issues and traffic issues in the Village as well as a major expansion of an already enormous Ridgewood Schools Budget of $110,000,000 ! Therefore it bears repeating that this election is key!
Posted on by — 1 Comment

Reader says The whole NJ but especially Bergen County is the Fair Share Housing playground. They can play with our lives as they wish.

CBD high density housing

I am gutted that all my heroic efforts to buy a house in Ridgewood are heading to waste. Affordable housing is never affordable and in the end when landlords are incapable of filling their units they will ask the courts to change laws in favor of section 8 and that’s the end of the town and start of the eternal sh!thole living. Speechless as to how powerless current residents are and nobody raises a voice about us. The whole NJ but especially Bergen County is the Fair Share Housing (FSH) playground. They can play with our lives as they wish.

I too was vocal against Valley but now I totally regret it. Valley would have been much better than what’s coming. I live near N Maple Valley property and I get chills down my spine when I picture what that area can become. Valley facilities would have been a miracle but now only God (FSH + Murphy) knows what it can turn into. Depressing.

Posted on by — 2 Comments

Reader says Forced Overdevelopment Will Destroy Ridgewood

CBD high density housing

It is horrible what is about to happen to Ridgewood. Yes, it is happening all over Bergen county with 800 more units approved for mahwah. People/leaders of Ridgewood must not just throw up our hands and say it is too late. We musyALL come together and undo what Aronson and others have embraced for Ridgewood. Please, we must all rally and stop this now. Is there not any council person, that will lead the charge and lead to preserve Ridgewood?

Posted on by — 4 Comments

Reader says In five years Ridgewood will be unrecognizable and a very crowded unpleasant place to live.

Sealfons-rendering

Don’t you get it. Ridgewood is already ruined. I know the four multi family monstrosities are not yet built. But they will be. In five years Ridgewood will be unrecognizable and a very crowded unpleasant place to live. And what about the unintended consequences of the four apt. complexes; water problems, sewage problems, crime; dangerous streets from too many vehicles, noise , vehicle pollution.
It doesn’t matter who wins this election. The damage is done. Your taxes will sky rocket most likely; the profit from renting the apts. will not cover the new problems.

Posted on by — 3 Comments

Reader says Aronsohn’s puppets will just pick up where they left off

aronsohn

As I said previously, we have no candidates with new ideas running. Sedon and Susan may have done nothing visible but push the garage that no-one wants anymore, but they haven’t done too much actual damage to Ridgewood. Aronsohn’s puppets will just pick up where they left off. That means that they will promote even more outlandish development in town, and may revert to that huge garage when basically we don’t want any. Everyone who cares at all about Ridgewood, or who plans to live here a few more years MUST VOTE. If you can’t stomach voting for any of them, you still must vote. Otherwise Aronson’s people will be a shoe in as they will be the only ones to draw the voters. If you stay home, you choose the puppets because they will win by default. All you can do this time is to vote for the current council and then spend some time finding someone with the kind of knowledge we need to lead this town.

Posted on by — Leave a comment

Reader says Not one of the current or former council members have ever stated publicly why they think that the new apartments are good for Ridgewood

Ridgewood 3 amigos

Not one of the current or former council members have ever stated publicly why they think that the new apartments are good for Ridgewood. These developments are just causing more issues for our already stretched budget and resources.
Last summer, we were forced to obey restrictions on watering our lawns due to a water shortage. Because I followed the rules, my lawn died. What will happen when the water demand is increased because of these new apartments? why is this good for Ridgewood?
why is this good for our schools? (my child’s class class size is close to 30)
why is this good for people who walk or drive through our town? (it is already congested)
why is this good for anyone besides the developers?
WHY DID WE LET THEM IN?

Posted on by — 3 Comments

Reader asks How will that garage benefit any of the residents?

Hudson garage

It seems that very few people can even think of a realistic reason to build the garage. Add to Ridgewood taxes so people in other towns can park near the station? Provide extra parking for the builders who refuse to supply what is legally required? (How are they getting by with that, anyway? Did they change the town rules about how much parking is required for any construction? Or do they think their building permits do not require adequate parking? Council, the doctor on Broad Street has plenty of parking and has been struggling for several years to be able to use the 210 building which she owns. Why do outsiders get by with every single thing they want?) This building on Hudson doesn’t do anything for Ridgewood residents, except taking away a large part of the parking for Mt. Carmel’s activities. Two decks might help in separate parts of town but no-one is going to walk from Hudson to Oak, much less further. The only beneficiaries will be the commuters and the apartment dwellers, and for that Ridgewood must have higher and later parking fees as well as an astronomical increase in our taxes? At least the schools benefit OUR children. How will that garage benefit any of the residents?

Posted on by — 8 Comments

Reader says We are in a situation now where we can choose the least worst alternative

Ridgewood 3 amigos

yeah it is the natural outcome. We are in a situation now where we can choose the least worst alternative. If this can gets kicked down the road yet again, the next steps would be the BIG main street proposals that are now taking place in towns like Bogota and Closter… that result would be more mixed use, fewer stores, more restaurants, banks, Gyms and apartments, putting more pressure on parking and schools which would require a bigger parking solution. While the choices now are not great, the building of a garage soon makes sense to curtail further expansion of mixed use stock a la other communities..

Posted on by — 11 Comments

Reader asks let’s all assume they build this thing, how does that change anything in terms of the parking landscape in this town?

Hudson garage

Wait, so the argument now is… because a previous council approved the building of condos, in order to “save” the Village we need to appease the developers and build a garage for them given that they will obviously not have the needed parking spaces for their new tenants….and if we don’t build this thing, this town will become a glorified Rt 17 strip filled with gyms, banks and more condos? Come on people…..let’s all assume they build this thing, how does that change anything in terms of the parking landscape in this town? Yes, commuters will use it, yes shoppers will use it, but lets be realistic, probably only those looking to shop on Broad St or very close to it. We all know that everyone in this town or those that come here want to park right across the street from where they’re going, as stated in many of the posts before, if you look for parking you will find it, but you may have to walk a bit. So the taxpayers of this town should spend millions of dollars to alleviate a problem that may or may not exist for two to three hours on Friday and Saturday nights?? Do the math, it doesn’t add up and with Uber that problem is going away. Let’s spend money on updating the current run down parking lots we have or reconfigure current parking lanes and see how that goes….what’s the downside? We need to stop looking backward and look forward….Uber and Amazon to name a few are changing how we live our lives….less brick and mortar, less cars being driven for nights out….that’s the future, not building a garage that maybe in 1990 there was a solid argument for.

Posted on by — 19 Comments

Reader says A garage is needed, As to the size of the proposed housing developments there is room for good debate

Sealfons-rendering

A garage is needed. I’m willing to accept that the size of such a facility is up to debate but in my opinion, as unpopular as it may be in this echo chamber, it is needed. It’s presence will not destroy the character of the town but will improve the quality our visits to downtown and the health of our businesses.There are plenty of other wealthier towns that have such a facility and their characters and/or home values have not be eviscerated.
As to the size of the proposed housing developments. I think there is room for good debate there as to whether the scope of the developments is appropriate for the downtown or whether they should have been allowed in the first place. I will say however that the empty lots that exist now are eyesores.

Posted on by — 3 Comments

“A Vision for Downtown” is a vision for the Destruction of the Village of Ridgewood

3 amigos in action Ridgewood NJ

February 6,2018

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ, on October 26,2012 at the time Mayor Paul Aronsohn and Deputy Mayor Albert Pucciarelli created what they called , “A Vision for Downtown” ( https://www.paularonsohn.com/news_articles/a-vision-for-downtown ) in which they detailed :

1)Ridgewood needs high-end apartments
2)Ridgewood needs a performing arts center
3)Ridgewood needs parking decks/garages
4)Ridgewood needs to be more business-friendly

Many view this “Vision” as a vision to destroy the Village of Ridgewood and turn into just another New Jersey overbuilt dumpy town .So now for ever more the Current Village Council and Village residents are stuck with the mess they created .

Unfortunately the high density housing was approved with the idea that a garage would pick up the slack with parking and allow the developers to offer less parking spaces . The fact that the developments will create a need for more schools, more water, more parking and generate more congestion in an overly congested central business district is left for the Ridgewood taxpayer to pick up the tab.

One wonders if some those who suggested there was enough water and that parking and congestion were not issues could and should be prosecuted ?

Posted on by — 3 Comments

Reader asks Will a portion of this garage be available to the builders so they can supplement their legal lack of parking by having Ridgewood residents pay to help them out?

traffic_2CBD_theridgewoodblog

One thing the Council has never responded to: Will a portion of this garage be available to the builders so they can supplement their legal lack of parking by having Ridgewood residents pay to help them out? It “may’ be used by commuters who can’t find parking on the streets. The stores and restaurants in town will continue to have their employees park directly in front of their businesses. Paul will still have his reserved “no parking” space in front of his wall. Who do you actually expect to use this space? Probably not shoppers or diners. And what about the Sunday/other Mt. Carmel uses of the lot that will be covered by the garage? Are we going to be expected to “pay for parking” that was formally free? And, to add insult to injury, the parking meters’ rates will be increased and the hours extended. Who wants that? Unless you can at least force the town’s various commercial employees to use it, who else will?

Posted on by — Leave a comment

Reader sugests annual “impact fees” for every unit above the usual permitted density

CBD high density housing

Does The garage allows developers to count the parking spaces there as required parking for the new developments? Since we are screwed by former council approvals the only way to cover the added costs of these new units is to charge ongoing annual “impact fees” for every unit above the usual permitted density. If 50 units are built where 25 is the usual permissible then the additional should bee charged for each bedroom multiplied by the cost of annual student expenditure . So if It costs $20,000 per year per student in the BOE budget,, and a unit has 2 bedrooms,then an annual impact fee of $40,0000 plus assessed real estate taxes. So 25 extra units have 50 extra bedroom require $1,000,0000 annual fees to the village.

Posted on by — 16 Comments

Ridgewood Water Admits High Density Housing Will Increase Demand for Water Usage

high density housing Ridgewood

February 1 2018

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ, during a question and answer at last nights Village council meeting, Councilmen Ramone Hache asked Richard Calbi of Ridgewood Water if it would be feasible to stem contaminates before they get into the water supply? Calbi answered that the best alternative to lower the Village’s consumption of Water. Saying Ridgewood Water’s goal is to get people to use less water outside lessening the need for the amount of water and the amount of water that needs to be treated .

Councilwomen Bernie Walsh followed up asking the obvious question ,what wells will the four new high density multi family developments draw from, what’s going to be the challenge? Richard Calbi claims New Jersey state calculations show Ridgewood with surplus water but the reality is far different during peak demand. Calbi then admitted there is going to be new demand with the developments but hedged that there was already a demand on those sites in the past , Calbi than made an astonishing assessment that in each development there would be an increase in consumption due to the amount of dwelling going in .

Mayor Knudsen jumped in and asked for clarification of the paper number and the real number, and Richard Calbi reiterated that at peak times during the summer Ridgewood Water simple does not have the capacity. Thus the need for water restrictions.

Was not the Village previously told that the new high density developments would lead to NO INCREASE IN WATER CONSUMPTION ? Can no flush Friday be far behind ?

Posted on by — 2 Comments

Reader says Residents have to accept it is a done deal

Don-Quixote-Windmill[1]

The point is that the ordinances for high density housing cannot be repealed. The court will stand up for the developers. That was what the lawsuit was about when Aronsohn was mayor. The grassroots group tried to stop the development on legal grounds.

Residents have to accept it is a done deal. To blame current govt. or ask them to repeal is impossible. The current council can do nothing.