Tag: high density housing

Posted on by — 5 Comments

Any development should enhance Ridgewood’s character

clock_cbd_theridgewoodblog

Any development should enhance Ridgewood’s character

JUNE 5, 2015    LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, JUNE 5, 2015, 12:31 AM
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS

Any development should enhance village’s character

To the Editor:

Those of us who chose to move to Ridgewood made a careful decision and chose a village with character over urbanized cities such as Morristown or Hackensack.

My family has experienced what Ridgewood has to offer young families, and it’s plentiful. However, I have noticed there is an obvious need for housing for empty nesters.

Overdevelopment in town is being driven by corporations’ strong desire to cash in, not enhance our downtown.

Our schools are overcrowded already; overdevelopment will increase taxes because it will increase the number of children who attend our schools, therefore adding more costs to taxpayers.

In order to protect the quality of our schools, the suburban life and the peace and tranquility of our neighborhoods; development should be reasonable and enhance our village character, not drastically alter it. One example of how development can enhance our downtown is providing green space and parking.

Overdevelopment and an unreasonable increase in density in our zoning laws will lower property values for all and hurt our village life. Urbanization of Ridgewood will decrease property values, as well. We must question the true intentions of those supporting special interests rather than protecting our community.

Wilkin Santana

Ridgewood

 

https://www.northjersey.com/opinion/opinion-letters-to-the-editor/letter-to-the-editor-any-development-should-enhance-ridgewood-s-character-1.1349607

Posted on by — 30 Comments

Reader says We know what to do come election time

vote_for_me_theridgewoodblog

We know what to do come election time. This agenda has been push by the 3 amigos for a long time. They have close ties with some of the developers who will profit by this along with member of the Chamber of Commerce . Next item on their agenda is the parking garage to help certain members of the Chamber. To show how enforcement of ordinances are only for certain people I direct you attention to the wall/planter in front of Greek to Me and the large political sign at Ken Smith Motors. Same person is responsible for both of them , a strong supporter of our Mayor.
Although I suspect that some if not most of the 1000 resident that sign the petition voted for the Dream Team that 1000 votes are enough to vote them out of office before the come up with something else to take car of their friends.

Posted on by — 2 Comments

Reader says Development a Detriment to the towns best Interest

RidgewoodCBD_theridgewoodblog

Straight out of the developers playbook…
Know that the existing standard density is 18-24 units per acre
Ask for 50 UPA
Settle for 35 UPA
Double the existing standardt!
But less than 50 UPA …Suckers…

The Planning Board only needs to point to the existing densities that have worked successfully in Ridgewood and say that’s it.
Or they can roll over and give the Developers 35 UPA, double the existing standard, which is what the developers really wanted…to the detriment of our town’s best interests.

Posted on by — 3 Comments

Ridgewood Planning Board clears way for high-density housing

clock_cbd_theridgewoodblog

JUNE 3, 2015, 9:14 AM    LAST UPDATED: WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3, 2015, 7:07 PM
BY CHRIS HARRIS
STAFF WRITER |
THE RECORD

RIDGEWOOD — Developers were all smiles as they left Tuesday night’s meeting of the Planning Board, which approved four separate amendments to the village’s master plan, paving the way for high-density, multifamily housing projects downtown.

Several residents walked out of Tuesday night’s meeting when the closing comments by members of the board made it clear even before the vote that the panel would be moving to advance the proposed zoning changes.

The four master plan changes were approved by majority vote; Wendy Dockray, a real estate agent, was the only member to oppose all four amendments. Both Susan Knudsen, a Ridgewood councilwoman who sits on the board, and Michele Peters, an attorney, opposed three of the amendments.

All three women said that a vote Tuesday night would be premature, calling for more discussion of the amendments.

The vote capped five years of meetings, public hearings, and expert testimony on the master plan amendments, first requested by four developers with plans for four different housing complexes.

One developer has since backed out, leaving three housing projects planned with a combined 208 apartment units.

https://www.northjersey.com/news/ridgewood-planning-board-clears-way-for-high-density-housing-1.1347831

Posted on by — 12 Comments

Reader says the developers are either stupid or were told by those involved in the process (council, planning board?) that it would be approved

misterrogers02

I will not sign the petition only because I have no idea what kind of backlash I might face by doing so. But I wholeheartedly object to their 35 unit/acre proposal. The developers knew the rules when they bought the properties. The rules allow 12 but let’s be generous and go with the 18-24 existing standard – they asked for double that and by their own admission were surprised by the resistance they’ve faced. So they are either stupid or were told by those involved in the process (council, planning board?) that it would be approved. They say the economics don’t work under the current rules – so who in their right mind would take that kind of risk? These developers do not have the best interest of the village in mind, they want more traffic (foot or otherwise) downtown. Who does this help? In some ways the businesses generally but much more so and longer term it helps the landlords. For years they have been jacking up the rents on businesses (driving many away) in a time where retail spending as a whole has moved online making brick and mortar stores less valuable. The landlords see this and are happy to support this over-expansion because there is no other way to fill that revenue hole than to extract it from current residents of Ridgewood.

There were 3 primary considerations for moving to Ridgewood (many years before our first child was even born btw so the “empty nester” argument is invalid here – we are 2nd generation Ridgewood).
1) Great schools
2) Safety – outstanding police and fire response
3) Charming, Beautiful place to raise a family and hopefully retire

Allowing this over-expansion enhances exactly none of those considerations. Ridgewood’s restaurants thrive, retailers do not and likely will not when even the high-traffic areas of 17 have been forced to close. Stop arguing that we need to draw bigger retailers into this town – I can drive to 17 if I can’t find what i’m looking for online. Enough with the nonsense arguments, and enough with Blaise trying to figure out how to stuff the maximum density into our limited space (all this based on his “expert” opinion even though he has zero ability to think about a broader common sense plan for development).

in short – just say No to the developers. It is not our responsibility to tell them what’s allowed – they knew that when they bought the property. Cutting your request from 4X what is allowed to only 3X is not a compromise, it’s still a snow job.

Posted on by — 5 Comments

PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING TONIGHT

Village _council_meeting_theridgewoodblog

file photo Boyd Loving

PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE/AGENDA

Tuesday, June 2, 2015

Village Hall Court Room– 7:30 P.M.

(all timeframes and the order of agenda items below are approximate and subject to change)

1.            7:30 p.m. – Call to Order, Statement of Compliance, Flag Salute, Roll Call – In accordance with the provisions of Section 10:4-8d of the Open Public Meetings Act, the date, location, and time of the commencement of this meeting is reflected in a meeting notice, a copy of which schedule has been filed with the Village Manager and the Village Clerk, The Ridgewood News and The Record newspapers, and posted on the bulletin board in the entry lobby of the Village municipal offices at 131 North Maple Avenue, and on the Village website, all  in accordance with the provisions of the Open Public Meetings Act.

Roll call: Aronsohn, Bigos, Knudsen, Nalbantian, Joel, Reilly, Dockray, Peters, Thurston, Altano, Abdalla

2.            7:35p.m. – 7:40 p.m. – Public Comments on Topics not Pending Before the Board

3.            7:40 p.m. – 7:45 p.m. – Committee/Commission/Professional Updates for Non Agenda Topics; Correspondence Received by the Board

4.            7:45 p.m. – 10:15 p.m. – Public Hearing: Land Use Plan Element of the Master Plan AH-2, B-3-R, C-R and C Zone Districts

5.            10:15 p.m. – 10:30 p.m. – Approval of Minutes: June 2, 2014; May 20, 2014

6.            10:30 p.m. – 11:00 p.m. – Executive Session (if needed)

7.            Adjournment

In accordance with the Open Public Meetings Act, all meetings of the Ridgewood Planning Board (i.e., official public meetings, work sessions, pre-meeting assemblies and special meetings) are public meetings, which are always open to members of the general public.

Members: Mayor Paul Aronsohn, Nancy Bigos, Councilwoman Susan Knudsen, Charles Nalbantian, Richard Joel, Kevin Reilly, Wendy Dockray, Michele Peters, David Thurston, Isabella Altano, Khidir Abdalla

Professional Staff: Blais L. Brancheau, Planner; Gail L. Price, Esq., Board Attorney; Christopher J. Rutishauser, Village Engineer; Michael Cafarelli, Board Secretary
Posted on by — 10 Comments

CBR change is good, growth is good, but this is too much

unnamed-12
Ridgewood NJ , CBR invites you to please open the link below and consider signing this petition. The Planning Board will most likely be voting on this amendment tomorrow night and we want to show them many people are not for this considerable change to our master plan from a density of 12 units per acre (current) to a density of 35 units per acre (almost triple).
Just to give you an idea of what other towns allow: Hackensack 22 units per acre, Teaneck 28 units per acre, Fair Lawn 17 units per acre, etc. Why would we want to have such a high density of 35 units per acre in our Master Plan? If they vote yes, there’s no turning back. Ridgewood will no longer be the charming Village we all love. Yes, change is good, growth is good, but this is too much. It needs to be a more reasonable number. Please sign and forward. Only 1 signature per e-mail address is allowed. Please send to your spouses e-mail address, so they can sign too.

https://www.change.org/p/ridgewood-nj-planning-board-village-council-vote-no-on-the-high-density-housing-amendment-at-35-units-per-acre-last-minute-petition?just_created=true

Posted on by — 6 Comments

“VOTE NO” to 35 units an acre revised Amendment to the Master Plan

Abraham-Godwin_theridgewoodblog

Fellow CBR Supporters — We need your help ASAP!

We have reason to believe that the Planning Board may vote on the revised Amendment to the Master Plan at tomorrow’s meeting!     Yes, this could all be over tomorrow night!

Please read and sign the petition below to urge  responsible planning and to encourage the Planning Board to “VOTE NO” to 35 units an acre .

Please SHARE THIS PETITION ASAP TONIGHT!

Share on Facebook, via email, on Twitter — everything!!
Encourage others to forward and share, as well!

here is the link to the petition!

https://www.change.org/p/ridgewood-nj-planning-board-village-council-vote-no-on-the-high-density-housing-amendment-at-35-units-per-acre-last-minute-petition?just_created=true

We hope to see you at the meeting:   Tuesday at 7:30 pm at Village Hall

Thank you for your continued Support!

Citizens for a Better Ridgewood
[email protected]

Posted on by — 1 Comment

Planning Board Meeting THIS Tuesday, June 2nd at Village Hall at 7:30 pm

unnamed-12

Fellow Supporters,

Please join us at the Planning Board Meeting THIS Tuesday, June 2nd at Village Hall at 7:30 pm

Agenda: FINAL Public Hearing on the Revised Amendment to the Master Plan that was put forth on April 21st  (Revised Amendment is attached)

We need your attendance at the next Planning Board meeting on Tuesday.  We are close to the end, but we must still attend the meetings and continue to urge our Planning Board to act cautiously when altering our Master Plan.  In our opinion, the Revised Amendment is still not appropriate for Ridgewood and will have long term negative consequences.

The new Amendment takes a one-size-fits-all approach to increasing density, offering the same benefits across all zones, regardless of the context or surrounding location — a risky approach that we do not support.

The new Amendment allows for up to 35 units an acre, with affordable for rent units included.  While this is indeed an improvement from the 40-50 units put forth in the initial Amendment, in our opinion, this is still too big of a jump from the 12 units per acre that is permitted now and the 22 units per acre average that currently exists in our down town.

Several properties (West Bergen Mental Healthcare and neighboring lots) that were originally identified as suitable for high-density housing in the first amendment have been eliminated from the revised amendment, which puts Ridgewood at risk for legal action for spot zoning.

In the revised amendment, the much larger Ken Smith property has been lumped into the same zone as the smaller Enclave (Sealfon’s) site.  These are two very unique properties and their zoning benefits should differ.

Our Village Planner insists that a minimum density (of approximately 35 units per acre) is necessary to economically incentivize developers to develop their properties and build housing, however, a lower density could be awarded that would still allow developers to build and profit.  Below is a link to a Letter to the Editor that references developers in HoHoKus that are seeking much lower density than 35 units per acre.

https://www.northjersey.com/opinion/opinion-letters-to-the-editor/letter-to-the-editor-don-t-make-ridgewood-a-city-1.1340472

Thank you for your continued support.

Please join us on TUESDAY at Village Hall at 7:30 pm.  Let’s continue to  urge our Planning Board to get it right!

Citizens for a Better Ridgewood
[email protected]

Posted on by — 3 Comments

Glen Rock discusses new zone for senior housing

glen_rock_theridgewoodblog

MAY 29, 2015    LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, MAY 29, 2015, 12:31 AM
BY RICHARD DE SANTA
STAFF WRITER |
GLEN ROCK GAZETTE

The Glen Rock Planning Board is addressing a potential borough ordinance that would permit the rezoning of appropriate borough properties for multiple dwelling senior citizen housing.

Planners met on May 4 to discuss and possibly recommend a draft ordinance to the Borough Council, which if approved would legally establish an “S-2” zone that could be applied to borough tracts deemed appropriate, in response to individual applications. The only option now open to developers of such projects is to apply for a use variance, according to board secretary Nancy Spiller.

But she told the Glen Rock Gazette last week that no ordinance recommendation emerged from the May 4 session, as members opted to address concerns over ordinance content and language to the board’s professional advisors.

The group includes borough planning consultant Christine Cofone, Planning Board attorney Stuart Liebman, borough engineer Al Roughgarden, construction official Brian Frugis, zoning officer Mark Berninger and Spiller as land use administrator.

“We are working to have a revised ordinance draft by the time the Planning Board is scheduled to meet again on June 1, so they can again consider it,” Spiller said.

https://www.northjersey.com/news/new-zone-for-senior-housing-under-discussion-1.1344789

Posted on by — 29 Comments

Don’t make Ridgewood a city

unnamed-12

MAY 22, 2015    LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, MAY 22, 2015, 12:31 AM
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS

Don’t make Ridgewood a city

To the Editor:

The Record ran an article on Tuesday detailing applications by two developers in Ho-Ho-Kus to construct new multifamily buildings with unit counts and densities much lower than the proposals here in Ridgewood.

A developer for the 2.12-acre site that currently houses Granny’s Attic on Maple Avenue is pitching 27 one- and two-bedroom apartments along with retail and office space, in a three-story building. This helps maintain the commercial character of Ho-Ho-Kus’ downtown area, while also providing a reasonable and responsible number of new apartments, including some affordable units. Looking at the apartments alone, the multifamily component density is 12.74 units per acre.

Another developer is looking to build 45 townhomes there on 3.66 acres, a density of 12.3 units per acre. I recognize that there are some differences between these proposals and Ridgewood’s, but what does stand out is that commercial, for-profit developers are proposing construction at densities much lower than those they are demanding here.

For the past few years, Ridgewood residents have been hearing from Ridgewood developers, our own village planner, and some members of the Planning Board, that much higher densities are required to incentivize the building of some new housing units downtown. The Ho-Ho-Kus proposals, in a borough very similar to Ridgewood, show that these excessive densities are not required. They are just the product of a desire for improving their property values and profits. But greed is not always good.

To date, Ridgewood’s planner has never given any studied and proper reasoning as to why we need to have densities of, first 50 apartment per acre, and now an amended 30-35 per acre (which is still too high). All we know is that 50 was declared the max and 35 is a number acceptable to some developers. But this is unacceptable planning for Ridgewood.

At the last board meeting, I asked our planner what financial due diligence was done to determine that Ridgewood’s developers needed this high density to make enough of a profit to spur development. I inquired what property purchase prices, what income and expenses and what cap rate of return were used in his pro-forma that says 30-35 is now the number. He admitted he had not done any such study, but came to the higher numbers because the Brogan site developer complained that an earlier determination of 25 per acre wasn’t enough for them. So, the current densities are based on a developer complaint.

That’s not good planning.

Many residents, along with Citizens for a Better Ridgewood, a group promoting smart and fair development in Ridgewood, are advocating for building new housing, but at densities more fitting for our village. If we cannot have the benefit of proper analysis to determine correct densities, we should go with what we know works here. Either keep the master plan the same at 12 per acre, or, if we want to incentivize development, raise it to 18-25/acre, the current average that exists throughout Ridgewood.

Don’t make Ridgewood a city. It’s a village.

Dave Slomin

Ridgewood

https://www.northjersey.com/opinion/opinion-letters-to-the-editor/letter-to-the-editor-don-t-make-ridgewood-a-city-1.1340472

Posted on by — 7 Comments

Housing complex proposed for downtown Ho-Ho-Kus

Limo-Taxi-Car-in-Ho-Ho-Kus-NJ-07423

MAY 18, 2015, 7:12 PM    LAST UPDATED: WEDNESDAY, MAY 20, 2015, 11:09 AM
BY CHRIS HARRIS
STAFF WRITER |
THE RECORD

HO-HO-KUS — A multifamily housing complex is being pitched for the borough’s downtown.

The proposed three-story development would have 27 one- and two-bedroom units. It would also have nearly 13,000 square feet of space for retail use and 9,300 square feet for offices.

Plans submitted to the Ho-Ho-Kus Planning Board show the proposed project would include some units of affordable housing.

Helmed by the borough’s Mechanic family, the owners of several properties throughout borough, the development would be built on 2.12 acres located in the heart of downtown, affecting 619 North Maple Avenue and 217 and 239 First Street.

To make room for the construction on the south side of North Maple Avenue, some demolition is planned, including the razing of Granny’s Attic, an antiques shop.

“The project will include significant architectural upgrades with careful attention to streetscape, together with enhanced drainage, landscaping, lighting and other site improvements which will present an aesthetically pleasing and appropriate redevelopment of the property,” the application states.

https://www.northjersey.com/news/housing-complex-proposed-for-downtown-ho-ho-kus-1.1337302

Posted on by — 6 Comments

Reader asks will we spend more tax dollars to improve our water pressure once we get the new apartments downtown?

sprinklers_vets_fielf_theridgewoodblog

Ah, so we can just spend more tax dollars to improve our water pressure once we get the new apartments downtown

And how the hell are we going to add another 500 to 1000 toilets, kitchen sinks, showers, bathroom sinks, etc when we put the projects in downtown? Are we expected to give up our gardens to ensure the developers make a profit?

But the developers have assured us their will be no adverse impact on the Village and I believe them (cough, cough)

Rain has nothing to do with restrictions. Ridgewood uses groundwater . . . . it would take many, years of drought to impact the supply of water available to us.

The reason we have restrictions if because our infrastructure is inadequate to pump all the water we might need in a worst case scenario (ex . everyone is watering their lawns and a huge fire breaks out). Ridgewood doesn’t want inadequate water pressure in and emergency.

We have plenty of water. Every year it has to be re-explained. A few years ago, we almost had a permanent solution to this problem with plans to install bigger water storage tanks that would have been able to maintain full pressure even during heavy usage. The local residents had it voted down because they thought it would hurt their views.

Posted on by — 13 Comments

Reader says Empty nesters have been selling their houses to families with young children for generations in Ridgewood

unnamed-12

Empty nesters have been selling their houses to families with young children for generations in Ridgewood and we’ve done just fine. Now the developers and their friends on our Council want to build hundreds of apartments in town for empty nesters. This is a pipe dream – we all know that these apartments will attract families with school children from nearby cities with school systems that lag behind Ridgewood’s.

A couple things are going to happen that nobody wants to talk about. 1. Kids who live in the apartments will go to Ridge, Willard and GW where class sizes are already beginning to tick up. 2. If empty nesters trying to sell their houses are competing with developers renting apartments to families with kids, the value of your house will go down.

We are being sold a bill of goods by special interest groups, specifically developers and labor unions, that are supported by 3 members of our Council. Their “studies” have produced laughable results – traffic will decrease and school population will stay flat. False and false.

Posted on by — Leave a comment

Ridgewood planner questioned on changes to master plan amendment

unnamed-12

MAY 7, 2015    LAST UPDATED: THURSDAY, MAY 7, 2015, 2:52 PM
BY MARK KRULISH
STAFF WRITER |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS

Ridgewood residents and Planning Board members questioned Village Planner Blais Brancheau on the latest changes to the amendment to the land use element of the master plan as multifamily housing hearings resumed Tuesday night.

Two weeks ago, Brancheau presented a reworked recommendation to the board for its consideration, which featured reductions in density, height and floor area ratio along with some zoning tweaks.

All three zones now feature a maximum height of 50 feet and a density of 30-35 units per acre. Floor area ratios were reduced by 20 percent in the AH-2 zone and 10 percent for the B-3-R and C-R zones since the latter two allow mixed-use, but not purely commercial, development.

The C-R zone was also reduced in size as the West Bergen Mental Healthcare building and its adjacent properties were returned to the C zone. The southern end of the originally proposed C-R zone, which includes the Ken Smith property, was moved into the B-3-R zone.

https://www.northjersey.com/news/planner-questioned-on-changes-to-amendment-1.1328929