Lakewood: Committee to Proceed With Removing Age Restriction at Pine River Village

6

pine-river-villageAt last night’s meeting, the Lakewood, NJ, Township Committee announced that it would proceed with removing the age restriction at Pine River Village, located off of Pine Street, marking the first sign of progress almost a year after the senior community’s residents pleaded for the change in order to attract younger homebuyers during the recession. The neighborhood, slated to hold 175 homes, is only about one-sixth complete after more than three years.

The committee said it received a letter from its attorney stating that changing the deed and zoning to allow all ages was legal. Committee members still want to meet with the developer, Reb Refoel Zucker, to examine his plans before making it final.

{Matzav.com Newscenter/APP}

 

6 COMMENTS

  1. The Township’s tax-payers are taking a big financial loss. The developer bought the Age restricted senior property at a tremondous discount. Age restricted property is worth a lot less (we are talking millions less to the township).The developer should have to repay that difference up-front.

    In a regular devolpment there are additional devolopment costs, parks, playgrounds, other parking requirements, etc. All of that should have to be put into the project. Otherwise the Taxpayers will be taking the hit for it like has happened in other developments.

  2. Puzzled,
    Didn’t you read the last sentence of Reb Tudel’s post? “Otherwise the Taxpayers will be taking the hit for it like has happened in other developments.”

  3. Rav yudel is right

    we will all loose monney on this

    and pay huge property taxes for the township who sells public land for penneys to developers

    WE ALL OWN LAKEWOOD TOGETHER EVERY PENNY SHOULD BE PAID BACK

    US POOR YESHIVELIET WILL SUFFER THE WORST FROM THIS

  4. And who is it that has worked tirelessly to make 100% certain that taxpayers “take the hit for it” in the other developments? THE LAC! Their entire reason for existence is to petition/lobby/extort the city for additional services (services they new they weeren’t getting when they agreed to buy in a development at a discount due to the lack of these services) paid for by the taxpayers. They might as well be collecting door to door asking the rest of us to help them purchase their homes.

  5. Dovi, chill. The alternative is to reject their request and see the project sit empty. Undeveloped land doesn’t pay taxes. Waive the restriction, develop the property, recoup far more than the loss on the sale in increased tax revenue. It’s a simple formula, really.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here