[ back ]
Audience vocally opposed to redevelopment
(by Kimberly Redmond - October 01, 2008)
 |
|
Photo Courtesy Of The Borough Of Emerson
The area included in the redevelopment study (outlined in red) is 34 acres, or 14 blocks on Kinderkamack Road. According to Borough Planner Joe Burgis, 75 percent of the area is primarily automotive, industrial and commercial.
|
A hostile crowd filled the Emerson High School Auditorium last week to express their opposition to the proposed redevelopment in downtown Emerson. The hearing, which Mayor Louis Lamatina, described as “lacking any sense of decorum” did not run very smoothly.
The presentation made by Borough Planner Joseph Burgis’, of Burgis Associates, at the Sept. 24 planning board meeting was rife with technical difficulties concerning the sound system and the size of the visual aids, and it was met with jeers by many residents in attendance.
Several members of the audience expressed their anger at not being able to hear Burgis or see the screen displaying his visual aids. As the presentation progressed, some audience members took out their frustrations calling out remarks such as “sit down!” and “this is a sham!”
Nevertheless, Burgis took the stage for an hour and a half to present the study prepared by his firm.
The area included in the study is 34 acres, which translates into 84 tax lots, or 14 blocks on Kinderkamack Road. Seventy-five percent of the area, stated Burgis, is primarily automotive, industrial and commercial.
The region has historically been plagued with problems concerning the interrelationship between traffic, parking, pedestrians and the NJ Transit railroad stop. Burgis reports that, in the last three years, the police have reported 166 accidents in the downtown area of Emerson. “50 percent of those accidents occurred immediately north of Linwood,” he said.
The plan currently proposes the addition of 381 residential units to be built atop commercial units lining Kinderkamack Road. Burgis’ plan calls for a comprehensive approach rather than a “piecemeal one” regarding the redevelopment. Burgis cites the downtown regions of
Ridgewood and Westwood as two towns as good examples of redevelopment since “they have a strong sense of place.”
Additionally, Burgis carefully explained the mechanics of how the lengthy process of designation would play out. According to Burgis, following the public hearings, the planning board will vote to either accept or reject the report, which designates the area in need of redevelopment. Based upon that vote, the board will make a recommendation to the borough council. The mayor and council can choose to adopt some, all, or none of the recommendations made by the planning board. In a redevelopment process, the ultimate vote lies with the borough’s governing body.
Public comment
Following Burgis’ presentation, the floor was opened up for members of the community to comment. For nearly 90-minutes, borough residents and downtown business owners offered their thoughts on the newly released redevelopment study conducted by Burgis Associates. Residents expressed their concerns regarding how additional housing units will affect taxpayers, the school system and local traffic circulation.
While varying concerns were voiced, perhaps what many felt most strongly about was losing the character of Emerson. “We own this town. We pay the taxes. People don’t want [redevelopment]. We want to keep Emerson as Emerson,” stated borough resident Liz Petriano, as cheers rang out in the auditorium.
David Stern, a borough business-owner, stated “Emerson has charm, as does
Ridgewood . But, Ridgewood is
Ridgewood and Emerson is Emerson.”
Mayor Louis Lamatina feels differently about this. “Redevelopment will only enhance the town’s character more. This type of project will make Emerson more consistent with the other
Pascack
Valley towns.”
Several business owners came forward to the podium to vent their frustration and confusion pertaining to how redevelopment will impact them financially. Bob Petrow, who owns four pieces of property on Chestnut Avenue, stated that owning property in an area being considered for redevelopment has poor financial implications. “I can’t do anything with my buildings. I can’t rent or sell them.”
Not all residents were entirely opposed to some aspects of redevelopment, particularly improving traffic circulation. William Price, a resident of the borough for about 11 years, agrees that something needs to be done about the traffic on Kinderkamack. “Kinderkamack has been a problem since the 1960s, when I was started driving. We knew back then to avoid it!”
He also agrees that something needs to be done with the storefront facades lining the Kinderkamack corridor. According to Price, the new drug store near the Emerson train station is a perfect example of what the other downtown shops should aspire to look like. However, he disagrees that the comprehensive plan recommended by Burgis is necessary. “I think things need to be changed piece by piece, but not to the magnitude of changing everything,” said Price.
Lamatina agrees that the Emerson Pharmacy and Oritani Bank did a “great job” of redeveloping their land. “Those two buildings are exactly what the proposed downtown area will look like,” said Lamatina.
Despite the overwhelmingly negative opinions expressed towards redevelopment at the hearing, Lamatina states that there were some residents in attendance who support the plan. “I know some people who wanted to speak up in support of the plan, however, they were worried about getting up in front of such an emotional crowd”, he said. According to Lamatina, some of those who came forward at the hearing were simply doing so “to make chaos.”
“Mob rule is not an effective rule,” Lamatina continued, “I know that the silent majority of Emerson is in support of redevelopment. I come into contact with residents all the time who ask me about the status of the project.” The mayor estimates four out of five residents in Emerson support redevelopment in some form.
The Sept. 24 meeting was the first of two planned hearings intended to educate the public about the mechanics of redevelopment and to foster an open dialogue on the issue. The next planning board hearing is set for Thursday, Oct. 2. According to Lamatina, the Oct. 2 hearing will “be similar to a court hearing because attorneys will cross-examine Burgis.”
Kimberly Redmond's e-mail address is redmondk@northjersey.com.
| Comments (1) |
On October 5, 2008 Greeley said:
I am shocked that the Mayor has deemed all those opposed to his redevelopment plan as being part of "mob rule" and voiced their opposition only to create choas. Yes, the business district needs a "make-over" but the town does not want 400, 600, 800 rental units or whatever number makes it a viable project.
How can all those rental units improve traffic on Kinderkamack Rd? |
| |
[ back ]
