Reader says When the developers financial interests matter more than the increased burden on residents they are no longer representing our best interests
Our government should absolutely be representing our best interests, and repealing the proposition that lead to the multi-family housing and Valley expansion fiascos would be a great start. When the developers financial interests matter more than the increased burden on residents they are no longer representing our best interests. If I owned a 3 bedroom home right now in need of any updating, I would be very worried about my home value decreasing too ( all values might go down a bit but that would seem the hardest hit).
What do you do when developers may own the property they want to develop — and invest in it’s development — it gets complicated doesn’t it –?
No simpleton. You don’t amend the master plan. The master plan is like the constitution.
No, it doesn’t get complicated at all. They develop within the parameters of the current master plan.
Next?
That’s the whole point, #1. The property owners are already entitled to develop their property, but within the current zoning regulations. At this moment, a residential development may have up to 12 units per acre. The Master Plan Amendment is proposing 40+ units per acre (actual # depends on which development they are talking about). Quite a jump, huh? It’s absurd that we would be considering a Master Plan change that would allow such a monumental increase. I don’t believe most people are against some downtown housing, but the proposal on the table is for 200+ apartments and could be (according to Blaise) expanded to 300-500 units.
The problem right now is that the PB has been stringing these developers along for 2 years now and no one has the guts to just say no and rethink the whole issue from the viewpoint of “What do WE want Ridgewood to be in the future?” If we want it to be multigenerational, then how do we want to accomplish that? What can we do to assure that the intrinsic character of Ridgewood will remain? These are the conversations that need to take place. Instead, we are reacting to a proposed Master Plan change requested by DEVELOPERS. These developers are trying to maximize their return. That’s understandable, but it is up to our PB and our Village Planner to guide this conversation and protect OUR RETURN (the interests of the tax payers) and the character of our Village.
In other towns those developers would have been asked to desist years ago. I thought they actually looked surprised when encouraged to continue.
The only people saying build baby build are the ones who will profit from building.
Yes #7 Profit both monetarily and politically
The first requirement for a town planner is to care about the town and what it is and why residents don’t want high density development.
Blais has no affection for Ridgewood. He sings Ridgewood like a robot, comparing him to Bruce Spingsteen singing Rise Up.
If I were making plans for anything I CARED about I would not say the proposed huge change would benefit on one side of my mouth and on the other say the devil is in the details and there will be some (unknown) impact. I wouldn’t recommend unless I was damn sure for something so truly lovely, and charming as Ridgewood. Why turn Ridgewood into a high density town, Blais and company?
Blaise doesn’t care about this town.
We have been robbed of our basic democratic right to participate. Blais stated that he would listen to the public if the public’s will were not based on poor planning. So, because we are all not professional planners, with regional planning credentials, who can sit up there and pontificate the hell out of every last thought , we don’t stand a chance in influencing his recommendation. Time to move.
No, let’s ask that Blais tender his resignation. He is not interested in this town’s welfare. He doesn’t care about the town or its residents.
With regards to real estate, the definition of highest and best use encompasses four tests. It is the most probable use of land or improved property that is legally possible, physically possible, financially feasible (and appropriately supportable) from the market, and which results in maximum profitability. Developers ONLY pay attention to the fourth test. Profitability.
So Brancheau doesn’t consider the extensive report prepared by CBR’s attorneys to be adequate planning? CBR spent tens of thousands on hiring a well respected law firm which prepared a 25 page report comparing densities of the most desirable municipalities in Bergen, towns comparable to Ridgewood, which have maintained densities per acre in line with, or just slightly higher than Ridgewood’s current master plan which allows for 12 units per acre in the business district…This report analyzed regs of 72 municipalities in Bergen..a quick review of this report makes it obvious that the densities being proposed in ridgewood are too dense.
The board also heard testimony from and received an 18 page report from professional planner Brigitte Bogart…who was also hired by CBR..this report details how the proposed development/amendment to the master plan would affect our schools, traffic, open space deficiency, need for additional resources such as police, fire, etc.,…Bogart also discusses in detail how any proposed amendment to the master plan should be reviewed with respect to open space and recreational facitilites…
Doesn’t sound like poor planning to me…I hope the board is considering this evidence it has before them and acts responsibly. We will remember come election time..in 2016 and for years to come… whether or not they acted to protect and preserve Ridgewood.
Its just not Blais. He is getting his marching orders from the 3 Councilpersons and Albert is leading the charge. I just hope that residents remember this when they run for re-election.