Tag: Urbanization

Reader says Any development proposal that is so severe that it requires a change to the town’s Master Plan SHOULD take time so all parties 

Reader says I’m relatively certain that it’s not within the Mayor’s power to advocate for amending the Master Plan at this point

I’m relatively certain that it’s not within the Mayor’s power to advocate for amending the Master Plan at this point. Nor is it within the power of his 2 running mates Mrs. Hauck and Mr. Pucciarelli – both of whom seem to have already made up their minds on the subject.

How about these 2 developers apply for variances just like anyone else that wants to build anything in this town. You want to be a little lenient with them, fine. Just keep it within the scope of the existing Master Plan. There’s your compromise.

Don’t allow 3 people who think they know better than the rest of us make such permanent changes to our town.

A little history lesson. We owe this master plan craziness to former Mayor Pfund and his desire to help out Valley bypass everyone in its over-expansion plan. Had he not pushed the change that allowed the hospital and developers to push for amendments, we would not be in this morass. I believe that if the master plan had not been changed to allow these cases, then Valley would have instead asked for exemptions on a building-by-building basis. They would have had something built by now. Smaller, yes. But one new building is better than nothing and looking like a fool in the process. Greed is getting the best of all of them.

And for this fine effort, Pfund was appointed our municipal judge for life.

 The problem as i understand the ordinance that exists is that we will be dealing with this over and over again even if we approve one or all of these proposals. That is the great fear…that if any of these projects is approved it will open the floodgates for other projects…all using what i will call the brother/sister argument (you let her/him do it so why can’t i?). And given that this has became such a legalized process, no one can assure that won’t sue to try to push through their proposals. I agree that something needs to be done but not with potentially open-ended litigation risk.

Reader says the current amendment proposal is doomed and the Mayor wants to make sure something gets through.

many on the planning board that night were skeptical of the mayor’s proposal that night. it clearly took many by surprise and you really have to question why he brought it up now. my best guess is that he sees the current amendment proposal is doomed and he wants to make sure something gets through. THAT ISN’T THE PROCESS!!

Let’s remember that the ordinance that allows these amendment proposals in the first place was pushed through by friends of developers (which includes their lawyers). They created a legal process that couldn’t be stopped or participated in by residents once it moved past debate at the council level (or so they thought – they didn’t count on something like the CBR). Recall how Al abruptly ceased debate on these and pushed the vote which brought them to the planning board. Now that the process isn’t working in their favor they are trying to split them up to make it look like a “compromise”.

Also remember this: The developers bought these properties knowing exactly what they were allowed to build. They were banking on being able to push through these amendments that quadruple the number of units/acre currently allowed. That’s just bad business decision making (unless you have some reason to believe your amendment will be helped along). Certainly helps explain why saraceno stormed out in the middle of the cross by his attorney of the CBR planner as it was clear he wasn’t going to rattle her.

If the current amendment proposals are voted down the developers have to go back to the drawing board and come up with a better plan. It is not the town’s job to tell the developers how much more they can get away with than is currently allowed – that’s like asking a cop how much faster you can drive over the speed limit while he’s writing you a ticket.

This is the process the developers and their attorneys created…stop whining because it’s not going your way now!!

Reader says So now the Master Plan is something to be tweaked and molded to meet any developers’ needs?

So now changing the Master Plan is reduced to a “regular” negotiable item on the table and is open to regular and frequent changes?

———-
Modifications to the Master Plan should be difficult to implement and should be considered only rarely – when absolutely necessary.

Apparently this mayor and council seem to consider a Master Plan change as one of the many “regular work-a-day tools” at their disposal.
———-

Clearly the ambitious plans of developers do not fit into the “essence” of RW – as evidenced by a need to change the Master Plan.

Changing the “proposed changes” to the Master Plan misses the function of the Master Plan and the problem at hand…
The problem IS NOT that the “original proposed changes” to the Master Plan were too severe.
The problem IS that the developers desires DO NOT FIT AND DO NOT BELONG in RW.

Readers debate cost of living in the Central Business District 

I went to their website and had problems with the “data” that they presented. They think that someone in stupid.

The P&I on my mortgage is $1,800. I have a large 5 br 3/3 bath home. My taxes are $2,500. I am not looking to downsize to a much, much smaller rental for a higher cost. This development does not solve my tax problem. It just gives me an expensive alternative. I think that I need a smaller house or townhouse, but not in Ridgewood.

BTW. How many parking spots do I get? We have two cars.

and ….

 How about your cost for lawn maintenance, snow removal, repairs and the set-aside for major repairs (new roof, new AC etc., etc.) I know a former Ridgewood resident who had a house that is probably similar in size to yours. He and his wife are empty nesters and they decided to move to an apartment in Manhattan. They have a 2br, 2bath unit with a doorman and pay $6000/mo. When I commented that it appears that it would have been less expensive to simply stay put in Ridgewood he laid out the cost for me and guess what they totaled about $6000/mo. The Ridgewood developers are talking about $3000/mo for 2br/2br. Granted Ridgewood does not compare with the Big Apple but for the difference in rent a couple could easily afford to go into the city several times a month …..and still have a few bucks left over.

https://downtownridgewood.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/RidgewodRumorVsReality.pdf

Reader says No one is against development, just gross and stupid over-development.

Number 1 Sure — very simple. One option, the developer who purchased the property follows the existing code — which will include some apartments and some single family homes as well as some business. Another option, the Village condemns the property using eminent domain and turns it into a park.

No one is against development, just gross and stupid over-development. You have exactly made the point as to why the developers are all wrong. Your argument is in effect, we need to approve the hundreds of units the developers want to build or we will have urban blight. Just the opposite is true — say no to over-development and the master plan as written will allow more sensible building with no need for amendments to the master plan or zoning adjustments.

Why do you suppose the speculator who bought that property is happy to have junky trucks sitting there now? Its exactly to bait people into voting for change without realizing the problems change will bring.

Now that you have heard these alternative solutions, I suppose you will agree with one of them?

Copied from CBR Facebook page:Can this town handle 50 units an acre? 

We need more members of the public to attend this meeting tomorrow night at RHS.(Sept 16, 7:30pm) There are only a few meetings left before the planning board comes to a decision on higher density housing in Ridgewood. Can this town handle 50 units an acre? What happens next? Will more developers seek the same zoning benefits? Will our town have to grant those requests or else fall victim to “spot zoning” claims and expensive litigation brought on by other land owners seeking the same density increases? Once this new zone is created, there is no turning back. 50 units an acre that cover 10 acres of our town. Our planning board needs to proceed cautiously and settle on a number that makes sense. This is what planning boards do. Planning Boards plan for communities and amend master plans to ensure a better quality of life for the residents. At what number should the density increase, in order to stimulate development, yet still compliment existing structures and not fundamentally change the character of this town? This whole process is like a walk on a tight rope. The answer lies in a delicate balance. We are hopeful that our planning board finds that balance and does not fall. Please come tomorrow night.

Change of Location : Special Public Meeting for Planning Board – September 16

PLANNING BOARD

AMENDMENT TO MEETING SCHEDULE

Special Public Meeting: Tuesday, September 16, 2014 

Change of Location

In accordance with the provisions of the “Open Public Meetings Act,” please be advised that the Planning Board has scheduled a special public meeting and work session for TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2014, in the RIDGEWOOD HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT CENTER, 627 E. RIDGEWOOD AVENUE, RIDGEWOOD, NJ beginning AT 7:30 p.m.

Reader says It is time to just say no to Urbanization 

Mr. Wrubel is right — the new housing will be a great accommodation for those looking to live in a more urban environment.

But he’s wrong in suggesting Ridgewood should be the site of that migration. The thing is, those of us not looking to living a denser environment are being asked to foot the bill for developers hoping to increase their profit. Those of us who have worked and paid taxes to maintain the standards of our Village are being told we need to open up the downtown for others to come in and enjoy the benefits of what has been built.

Mr. Wrubel’s basic premise is entirely backwards looking. Its been said many times on this blog before and it is worth repeating: A downtown exists to serve the town and not the other way around. If the functionality of Ridgewood’s downtown has reached a historic end, because its been replaced say, by Route 17 shopping, then the downtown parcel should revert to open space or single family homes in keeping with Ridgewood’s community purpose. The death of the downtown should not be allowed to kill off Ridgewood altogether, and that is what a lot of well meaning people seem to overlook.

Let’s look to the future and beyond the self interest of the developers and the yarns they have spun: Young families continue to want to live in a safe, suburban environment in the long desirable Village of Ridgewood — why are folks in such a rush to take away that opportunity? Why is our Planning Board and Council even considering allowing that to happen?

It is time to just say no.