|
|
 Marlboro Inn Designation – JRM, 7/13/2004 The Marlboro Inn designation decision has been an active debate, to say the least. This Council and the prior one have tried to follow our own procedures and those that govern municipal land use in an open and deliberative fashion. The debate became prominent in the papers, in cyberspace, in Council chambers and in the recent campaign. I have been committed to following the procedures, acting legally, listening to all sides and, ultimately, to make a decision that I deem to be the best one for the township of Montclair. I have no agenda, no preconceived idea other than to study any issue, listen to all sides, weigh the input that I receive and then take action. It was important to me that the Council, especially the new one, introduce an ordinance and then listen to and study the issues. We have done that. Tonight we have revisited the criteria for designation. Should we landmark the Inn, we will restart the clock on procedures that still allow the developer to demolish the property. In fact, responding to our intentions on March 2nd, these procedures began at that time. Notices of demolition were posted and offers for purchase were entertained. In fact, the Inn has been for sale for many years and has not been purchased and/or renovated for continuation as an Inn, a non-conforming use in a residential area. My views of financial feasibility are not relevant, but, clearly, potential purchasers do not see possibilities in renovating and operating the Inn in its present configuration and condition. It will take an investment far greater than the purchase price to attract visitors to this particular location. I am also not willing to use taxpayer money to purchase, renovate and maintain physical space that the community does not need. As we embark on a six year update of the Master Plan, we need to consider the economic pressures on large open properties. We need to revisit zoning, usage, our historic preservation ordinances, along with affordable housing and other modifications. A land use summit will be useful in this effort. But now, we need to address a property zoned residential on which 12 houses exiting directly to three streets could be built. I’ve been asked how I determine what I think is best for the community and how I determine what the community wants – they are good questions. Personally, I listen and speak to as many people as I can in as many different environments. I attend meetings, hearings and community activities. I read the Watercooler. I communicate by email to a large number of citizens. And then I weigh what I hear. I consider the arguments and the knowledge, experience and connection to Montclair of the proponent. It is my opinion, based on the above, that we have already explored alternatives for the Marlboro Inn, that land-marking will only delay further good faith negotiations and that it is not a viable structure in today’s Montclair.
|
|
BACK TO ... July 2004 Update |
