multi-family housing - Page 7 of 21

Posted on June 2, 2015June 2, 2015 by James — 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 June 2, 2015June 2, 2015 by James — 10 Comments

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

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 June 1, 2015June 1, 2015 by James — 6 Comments

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

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 June 1, 2015January 20, 2019 by James — 1 Comment

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

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.

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 May 30, 2015May 30, 2015 by James — 3 Comments

Glen Rock discusses new zone for senior housing

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 May 30, 2015May 30, 2015 by James — Leave a comment

Homebuilding revs up in NJ, led by multifamily construction

MAY 30, 2015 LAST UPDATED: SATURDAY, MAY 30, 2015, 1:20 AM
BY KATHLEEN LYNN
STAFF WRITER |
THE RECORD

Home construction continues to heat up in New Jersey, especially in the multifamily sector, as builders obtained the largest number of monthly permits in April since the housing-boom days of 2005.

More than 3,700 building permits were issued last month. So far this year, 9,118 permits have been issued, up 12.3 percent from the first four months of 2014, according to the U.S. census.

This year’s increase in activity has been powered by the multifamily sector, as New Jersey’s long-term patterns of suburban, single-family development shift to a denser, more urban style. So far this year, multifamily permits have accounted for almost two-thirds of building permits issued in the state, as builders respond to a higher demand for rentals.

Patrick O’Keefe, an economist with the accounting firm CohnReznick, which has offices in New York and Roseland, expects single-family starts to remain flat, in part because young adults — the so-called millennial generation — often can’t qualify for mortgages because of tight lending standards and high levels of student-loan debt. In addition, he said, millennials “have experienced a housing market where prices went down, and have a more realistic assessment of housing as an asset.”

https://www.northjersey.com/news/business/multifamilies-fueling-home-building-1.1345497

Posted on May 24, 2015May 23, 2015 by James — 29 Comments

Don’t make Ridgewood a city

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 May 21, 2015May 21, 2015 by James — 7 Comments

Housing complex proposed for downtown Ho-Ho-Kus

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 May 16, 2015May 16, 2015 by James — 6 Comments

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

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 May 13, 2015May 13, 2015 by James — 13 Comments

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

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 May 8, 2015May 8, 2015 by James — Leave a comment

Ridgewood planner questioned on changes to master plan amendment

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

Posted on May 4, 2015May 4, 2015 by James — 3 Comments

NJ home-building starts off slowly in first quarter

MAY 4, 2015 LAST UPDATED: MONDAY, MAY 4, 2015, 1:21 AM
BY KATHLEEN LYNN
STAFF WRITER |
THE RECORD

Home construction in New Jersey has gotten off to a slower start this year, with builders starting 5,352 units in the first quarter, down 8.3 percent from a year earlier.

But Patrick O’Keefe, an economist with CohnReznick in New York and Roseland, expects builders to rev up construction later this year, giving the homebuilding sector “its best performance since 2006.” O’Keefe is forecasting that about 30,000 housing units will be started in the Garden State in 2015, compared with 28,119 in 2014.

Multifamily activity will continue to provide momentum for home construction in the state, O’Keefe said. In the first quarter, multifamily construction made up 59 percent of the building permits issued in New Jersey.

“We will be looking at multifamily as the dominant driver,” he said. For the past several years, well over half the construction in the state has been in multifamily projects — especially rentals, concentrated in Bergen, Hudson and other northeastern New Jersey counties.

One example is Hudson Lights in Fort Lee, a mixed-use project being built just south of the George Washington Bridge. Its first stage, expected to be finished at the end of this year, will include 276 rental units. A second stage, expected to be completed in 2018, will include 201 housing units.

The developer, Chicago-based Tucker Development Corp., sees continuing demand for rentals, especially in neighborhoods where stores, restaurants and transit are within walking distance.

Young people starting out in their careers want “the ability to be more mobile,” said CEO Richard Tucker.

Economists also note that many younger adults are renting, rather than buying, because it’s difficult to qualify for mortgages and because they are wary about investing in a home after seeing values crater during the housing crash.

Adding to the demand for rentals, Tucker said, are empty nesters who decide they don’t need large houses anymore.

The national homeownership rate is 63.7 percent, the lowest level since 1993. The rate had exceeded 69 percent in 2004 as mortgage lenders loosened their credit standards and lent to many people who couldn’t afford the payments and ended up losing their homes.

Homebuilders’ slow start this year is only temporary, O’Keefe said, citing the complex planning and approval process involved in multifamily projects.

https://www.northjersey.com/news/business/n-j-home-building-is-off-to-a-slow-start-1.1324886

Posted on May 4, 2015May 4, 2015 by James — Leave a comment

Ridgewood Planning Board Public Meeting : Public Hearing on the Revised Amendment to the Master Plan that was put forth on April 21st

05/05/15 7:30PM Planning Board Public Meeting – Village Hall Court Room

Please join us on Tuesday, May 5th at Village Hall at 7:30 pm

Agenda: Public Hearing on the Revised Amendment to the Master Plan that was put forth on April 21st

At the last Planning Board meeting on April 21st, the Village Planner, Blais Brancheau, presented a NEW Amendment that takes a one-size-fits-all approach to increasing density — a risky approach that we do not support. In our opinion, Mr. Brancheau continues to plan for profit, not for the people of Ridgewood. The revised amendment is VERY different from the amendment that was proposed in November of 2013 and in our opinion, is looking more and more like spot zoning. (The revised amendment is attached.)

Thoughts:

Blais Brancheau, the Village planner, stated that the zones he identified as suitable for high-density housing in the first amendment were being considered because housing at these locations would be beneficial to the public at large. Why then, in the 11th hour, did the planner eliminate several properties (West Bergen Mental Healthcare and neighboring properties) that have been in consideration for more than two years? We never, not even once, heard any Planning Board member suggest this change. Yet this was one of the biggest changes in the revised amendment. We don’t get it.

In another significant change, the much larger Ken Smith property has been lumped into the same zone as the smaller Enclave (Sealfon’s) site. This move makes a bold statement. By combining these two sites into one zone, the Village planner has thrown all of the initial criteria he specified when identifying zones for high-density housing out the window. These are two very unique properties and their zoning benefits should differ. By lumping them together and labeling them as one in the same, Mr. Brancheau has basically set up every property in between these two sites to argue for the same zoning benefits. In our opinion, this is a reckless approach.

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. Instead of establishing a maximum density up to 35 units per acre, why not raise the minimum and allow our village to examine each new development on a case by case basis? We recommend raising the baseline density to 24 units an acre, doubling the permitted allowance. Our Planning Board could then work to establish criteria that would allow for density bonuses, beyond the baseline. For example, if developers can provide for more parking, affordable housing units, open space, greater set backs, green building practices, etc… they would be allowed a bonus of more units per acre than the baseline. This cautious approach would be preferable to a one size fits all zoning change that could have irreversible repercussions.

Mr. Brancheau is capable of crafting this amendment differently, yet he continues to offer the same benefits across the board to all zones, regardless of the context or the surrounding location. We don’t understand why. From our vantage point, many Planning Board members seemed flustered by the changes to the Amendment and some even expressed question or concern. The only Planning Board member who seemed to embrace these changes was Mayor Aronsohn. He seems very eager to move forward and get this done.

CBR wants this process resolved as well, but we want it done RIGHT. We don’t want the Planning Board to rush to a decision. We just received a copy of the new Amendmenton Friday, and the Public Hearing is TUESDAY! We live here and we care about the future of our town. Long after politicians are out of office and eager developers have reaped their profits, we will still be left here, living with the consequences.

Please join us on TUESDAY, May 5th at Village Hall at 7:30 pm. Let’s continue to urge our Planning Board to get it right!

Here are two links to Letters to the Editor that provide more detail about our position:

https://www.northjersey.com/opinion/opinion-letters-to-the-editor/letter-to-the-editor-ridgewood-grassroots-group-responds-to-master-plan-amendment-1.1323134

https://www.northjersey.com/opinion/opinion-letters-to-the-editor/letter-to-the-editor-many-questions-still-unanswered-regarding-ridgewood-downtown-housing-1.1323121

Thank you for your continued support.

Citizensfora BetterRidgewood
[email protected]

Posted on May 2, 2015May 2, 2015 by James — Leave a comment

Many questions still unanswered regarding Ridgewood downtown housing

MAY 1, 2015 LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, MAY 1, 2015, 12:31 AM
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS
Print

Many downtown housing questions still unanswered

To the Editor:

Having attended virtually all the Planning Board meetings on the proposed high-density housing master plan amendment for the past several years, and being as directly involved in the process as a concerned resident can be, I am left with one overarching question: Why? This notion of “Why?” relates to so many questions in this process that have yet to be answered, but need to be for the Planning Board, mayor and council to make the real right decision for the residents of Ridgewood. Here are some variants of “Why?” as related to this bizarre master plan amendment process:

Why did the original amendment contain the massive density number of 50 apartments per acre requested by the developers, when our current zoning only calls for 12 and the village average is 18-22?

Why hasn’t the board or the planner ever explained why 50 units per acre was used (except to note that it was requested by the developers and puzzlingly, as suggested by one board member, is necessary to incentivize the developers to build and profit)?

Why, as with so many important changes to Ridgewood, was the public not fully informed and educated in a proactive, openly invited manner and asked for opinion at the outset of the process years ago?

Why has the Planning Board failed to conduct and provide its residents with a comprehensive and necessary master plan review – that looks at all village-wide planning needs and impacts – prior to implementing such a monumental change to our village (and is actually required to be performed in 2016 anyway)?

Why do some members of the Planning Board appear to believe that the board’s and the village planner’s reactionary reviews of data provided by the developers constitute a thorough and responsible review?

Why are the opinions of so-called “experts,” hired by developers to sell the board on the benefits of this overwhelming change, given more respect than those of concerned residents, who will forever have to live with these changes?

Why is the Village Council separately looking at an additional large-scale assisted living complex development on the corner of Franklin and Walnut, without openly and clearly combining the master planning review with the high-density housing?

Why was the most recent amendment revision not provided to the public at last week’s Planning Board meeting, along with the revised zoning map?

Why does the Village Planner believe that the newly proposed density of 30-35 units per acre is now the correct number across the board, in all areas of the Central Business District?

Why can’t we go with what we know works in Ridgewood, 18-24 units per acre, which is still double the current zoning allowance?

Why isn’t the board more concerned with potential impacts on schools, parking, open space and village services?

Why can’t we keep Ridgewood as a village?

As a resident of Ridgewood who truly loves this town, I look forward to real answers to these “Why’s?”

David Slomin

Ridgewood

https://www.northjersey.com/opinion/opinion-letters-to-the-editor/letter-to-the-editor-many-questions-still-unanswered-regarding-ridgewood-downtown-housing-1.1323121

Posted on April 28, 2015April 27, 2015 by James — Leave a comment

Ridgewood planner proposes zoning, density changes to master plan amendment

1513179_863357633703083_5335724500916941931_n

APRIL 27, 2015 LAST UPDATED: MONDAY, APRIL 27, 2015, 9:24 AM
BY MARK KRULISH
STAFF WRITER |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS

Proposed changes to the master plan amendment were presented to the Planning Board by Village Planner Blais Brancheau in an attempt to address some concerns discussed by board members at a previous meeting.

Ridgewood Planner Blais Brancheau discusses proposed changes to a master plan amendment that would allow multifamily housing in the Central Business District.

The new amendment features zoning changes as well as a reduction in density, lowering the total number of possible units to less than 300 if the zones contained in the master plan amendment were built out to maximum capacity.

Changes in the maximum height, floor area ratios and additional language to require recreation and social amenities as part of any housing project were also presented.

The board voted unanimously to formally prepare the changes for a public hearing at its next meeting on May 5, where both the public and board members will be able to comment and ask additional questions.

Key zoning changes include three properties in the area of West Bergen Mental Healthcare building being excluded from the C-R zone, moving the Ken Smith property and the area at the corner of Franklin Avenue and Chestnut Street into the B-3-R zone.

https://www.northjersey.com/news/ridgewood-planner-proposes-density-decrease-1.1319562

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)