This is an inappropriate development for the area and our community.
C
Christine Heinicke
11 years ago
I don't like the language of the petition's stated concerns: "#3..... and possible crime resulting from a bursting infrastructure;..."
Otherwise, I agree that this is an already heavily traveled area with traffic and parking challenges because of the school and playing field.
I also agree that the addition of 59 households could be a serious challenge to our schools which have already declared insufficient seats for all of the students in district.
C
Christine Heinicke
11 years ago
I don't like the language of the petition's stated concerns: "#3..... and possible crime resulting from a bursting infrastructure;..."
Otherwise, I agree that this is an already heavily traveled area with traffic and parking challenges because of the school and playing field.
I also agree that the addition of 59 households could be a serious challenge to our schools which have already declared insufficient seats for all of the students in district.
J
JulaCordeira
11 years ago
I am against the development of this complex!
T
Tanya Marks
11 years ago
I'm against this construction!!
J
Jennifer Zinman
11 years ago
Our schools cannot handle more students.
A
Anonymous
11 years ago
Horrible idea
A
Anonymous
11 years ago
Featured
Terrible idea. Instead of developing an apartment complex, they should utilize the space for additional athletic fields given that GR doesn't have enough to support the community.
M
Meghan Dinneen
11 years ago
Featured
The density of this project is out of scale with the community. The existing zoning and area do not justify a change in zoning. 3 or 4 houses can be refurbished rather than exploited for an out of character development.
D
Dena Stratton
11 years ago
Featured
There are two reasons we decided to buy a home in in this town and take on this overpriced tax bill--the schools and the easy commute to NYC. A complex like this would potentially overcrowd both of these, and that is unacceptable.
E
Elena Moldovan
11 years ago
We strongly object to the construction.
M
Mihai Moldovan
11 years ago
Strongly object to the proposed development!
C
Christopher Hanson
11 years ago
This is not the development the community needs. Schools should be funded in a significant way by the developer for any approval.
L
Lorraine mclaren
11 years ago
There are many other ways to develop our community positively besides building this development which does not fit the character of our town.
L
Lorraine mclaren
11 years ago
There are many other ways to develop our community positively besides building this development which does not fit the character of our town.
M
Melissa Woertz
11 years ago
If approved, the builder should FUND classroom additions to two schools. FAS and RAS
P
Peter Collins
11 years ago
No, thank you.
E
Elizabeth K. Baker
11 years ago
It is important to note, however, that no decision will be made on this proposal in July! Indeed, it will be a long time before the Planning Board comes to any decision about how the site should be developed, much less whether this particular proposal has merit.
P
Pamela J DeLuca
11 years ago
Featured
It zoning is there to protect the integrity of it historic town. No amount of ratesbles justifies changing this. No $ will be gained.amy new taxes will have to pay for increases in infrastructure needs (police, teachers, garbage pickup, DPW etc. )
46 Glen Ridge Parkway Glen Ridge
This is an inappropriate development for the area and our community.
I don't like the language of the petition's stated concerns: "#3..... and possible crime resulting from a bursting infrastructure;..." Otherwise, I agree that this is an already heavily traveled area with traffic and parking challenges because of the school and playing field. I also agree that the addition of 59 households could be a serious challenge to our schools which have already declared insufficient seats for all of the students in district.
I don't like the language of the petition's stated concerns: "#3..... and possible crime resulting from a bursting infrastructure;..." Otherwise, I agree that this is an already heavily traveled area with traffic and parking challenges because of the school and playing field. I also agree that the addition of 59 households could be a serious challenge to our schools which have already declared insufficient seats for all of the students in district.
I am against the development of this complex!
I'm against this construction!!
Our schools cannot handle more students.
Horrible idea
Terrible idea. Instead of developing an apartment complex, they should utilize the space for additional athletic fields given that GR doesn't have enough to support the community.
The density of this project is out of scale with the community. The existing zoning and area do not justify a change in zoning. 3 or 4 houses can be refurbished rather than exploited for an out of character development.
There are two reasons we decided to buy a home in in this town and take on this overpriced tax bill--the schools and the easy commute to NYC. A complex like this would potentially overcrowd both of these, and that is unacceptable.
We strongly object to the construction.
Strongly object to the proposed development!
This is not the development the community needs. Schools should be funded in a significant way by the developer for any approval.
There are many other ways to develop our community positively besides building this development which does not fit the character of our town.
There are many other ways to develop our community positively besides building this development which does not fit the character of our town.
If approved, the builder should FUND classroom additions to two schools. FAS and RAS
No, thank you.
It is important to note, however, that no decision will be made on this proposal in July! Indeed, it will be a long time before the Planning Board comes to any decision about how the site should be developed, much less whether this particular proposal has merit.
It zoning is there to protect the integrity of it historic town. No amount of ratesbles justifies changing this. No $ will be gained.amy new taxes will have to pay for increases in infrastructure needs (police, teachers, garbage pickup, DPW etc. )