Planning Board Moving Toward New Approach on 'Fast Food' Ordinance
Planning board's new direction seeks to regulate impacts of restaurants; one member questions need to change at all
The planning board gathered to again determine the direction it should take in reworking the "fast food" ordinance, developed over 30 years ago with the aim to prohibit garish, styrofoam-laden burger joints from operating in the historic business district.
While it's been largely successful at doing that, it's something of a double-edged sword and the prospective plan is not without challenges, according to Village Planner Blais Brancheau.
"The current definition and current regulations are having the effects beyond what was originally intended in that they are discouraging other businesses that are similar to fast food restaurants," Brancheau said, noting several existing businesses that could fall under the fast food umbrella already operate in the village as well, creating impropriety issues.
"The intent in what I put before the board is not to discourage those businesses but to allow them to occur," subject to regulations, he said.
At least seven businesses have recently been turned away under the fast ordinance requirements, many of which were yogurt shops. None have been traditional fast food burger operations and Brancheau has said he doesn't believe they'd try to get into the CBD anyway given a lack of parking, no drive-thru allowance and regulated architecture.
New plan of attack?
Given the input of the board on Tuesday night, Brancheau said it appeared to be favoring a "performance-based zoning" undertaking in potentially revising the ordinance. This effectively means instead of creating ordinances to restrict business types in zones, the code would regulate impacts of the establishments, such as noise, odors, signage – the major concerns members have with allowing "fast food" in the CBD.
To date, the only concrete changes to revising the ordinance are to prohibit a drive-thru window at establishments.
Brancheau on Tuesday presented the planning board a series of documents for its consideration – a definition of what fast food is; an analysis of other municipalities' related ordinances; and a final document exploring which zones are appropriate for "fast food."
In his analysis of how other municipalities handle fast food regulations, Brancheau said the most restrictive regulations apply to drive-thru restaurants, the least restrictive to restaurants, and fast food lies somewhere in the middle.
Semantics?
"It's not about Wendy's," Mayor Keith Killion said in his assessment of the problem at hand.
The mayor noted that people get "too hung up" on the term "fast food," remarking that the issue applies to a much greater scope of planning and zoning. Pizza places, ice cream shops, bagel stores and others are all enveloped in the discussion, he said.
The issue, in general, is in maintaining the integrity of the downtown's street scape while not prohibiting businesses that are desirable, he said.
Member Kevin Reilly echoed some of those ideas, remarking that standardized architecture, logos, colors are designed particularly to catch the eye, not blend in.
"We have a traditional downtown, and personally, I prefer to keep the look," he said. Reilly advocated for keeping some controls in place to mitigate impacts.
"We need to find a balance," Killion exclaimed. "I don't know where that balance is."
If it ain't broke, don't fix it?
Yet others didn't appear in favor of balance at all Tuesday night.
"In thinking about this serious question of what to do with our village in terms of changing ordinances and rules that by-and-large have worked," said member Constantino Suriano, "What I don't get is why we have to change things just for the sake of change."
"I realize that real estate interests would like to fill some stores, which is all well and good," he said, "but this is not a city, this is not a mall."
Suriano again echoed that he had concerns with odors, loitering, lighting, traffic and garbage. He sought greater examination as to the impetus for change.
Difficulties with new zoning direction
Although the board appears to be moving forward in "performance-based zoning," it's not without its quandaries.
Administering and enforcing "impacts" like odors, lighting and others, Brancheau said, is "very hard to do."
The planner told the board that "slow food" has many of those same impacts, creating just as much complexity in drafting an ordinance that stands the legal test, brings "desired" businesses back into the fold, and still maintaining controls to regulate smells, lights, signs and traffic.
"This is a tough issue," he said. Replied Mayor Killion, "I have faith in you, Blais."
The board will discuss more of Brancheau's potential revisions in future meetings.
Boyd A. Loving
7:04 am on Thursday, September 22, 2011
Those members of the Planning Board who just "don't get" why such an outdated ordinance needs to be changed should leave the comfort of their respective homes just once and take a short walk through the Village's Central Business District. If anyone still "doesn't get it," they should immediately submit their resignations to the Mayor and Council. This is not rocket science folks!
Gene Callaghan
11:28 am on Thursday, September 22, 2011
Stop Adding Food Establishments and protect the retail we have left. The Mayor is right that there needs to balance but what needs to be balance is not the type of restaurants but the number of Restaurants. In order to have a great down you need a good mix or ballance of Restaurants, Retail and Services. Right now we are tipping too hard toward Restaurants and Services(ie salons and banks). We need ordinances that protect the retailers not make it easier for more restaurants.
Ed S
3:53 pm on Thursday, September 22, 2011
Gene: Your suggestion mirrors a similar sentiment expressed some years ago by then Chamber of Commerce President Oliver Abel (Olivers Chocolates). He argued passionately for the Council to delete banks as a permitted use in the B1/B2 zones. This would have forced them to apply for a variance which would have imposed a hurdle. Nothing was done and the onslaught of the banks (followed by their more recent departure) has arguably contributed to the decline of the CBD. The difficulty with Olivers argument back then and yours now is how do you determine the right mix of businesses ? Also, what is right today may well be wrong tomorrow. One thing is for certain though, we miss you and Irish Eyes in Ridgewood. You define the type of retailer we need and want. Ridgewoods loss was Westwoods gain.
henry seamon
10:23 am on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Ridgewood is starting to look like the rust belt. Any fast food that is is healthy and doesn't have a drive in, will help are village and make it look like Ridgewood not like Scranton PA.
Gene Callaghan
10:33 am on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Henry, Your response is exactly what is wrong with Ridgewood. Fill it with anything and it will fine. So you are OK with Ridgewood ave turning into a strip mall full of corporate chains that give nothing back to the town. We need the local retailer back. Ask anyone who has run a fund raiser in town, which stores donate to local charities and schools. It is the locally owned store. The chains like Dunkin Donuts and starbucks do not. These corporate restaurants do not join the chamber or participate in any downtown events or planning.
Dominick Nizza
10:51 am on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Large corporate employers do employ many local residents and do pay the Village assessments and taxes. Most of them are more efficient than 'local politicians' that are motivated quite differently.
henry seamon
12:37 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Gene, I didn't say anything, but a nice stores like ice cream or yogurt, will help the town. If we could get a Red Mango or a Pinkberry they will donate to local charities and schools. Where ever these stores are they always join the chamber of what ever town there in. We will get new stores in town because every body want to be near them.
Harlan Consider
2:15 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
I think we would be on very shakey ground if we started to try and allow only certain types of stores. Yes, it would be wonderful to have a Norman Rockwell downtown, but the owners of the buildings have a fundamental right to lease their spaces to who they want to. The only restrictions should be businesses that lower the tone of the CBD. The building owners expect to get paid each month, and unfortunately, the most reliable payees are banks, and to a lesser extent, restaurants. It's all but impossible for retail stores to maintain profitability in the traditional small shop setting these days.
Gene Callaghan
2:37 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Henry, I would love to see those store come to Ridgewood also, but where they go is important. We need smart downtown planning. Ridgewood Ave CBD should maintain a variety of stores in order fo it to be an attractive downtown for consumers. If we leave it up to Neal, we would have nothing but banks and who would find that attractive for downtown, which in turn hurts Real Estate in Town. We should support a ratio of Retail,Service and Food on Ridgewood Ave. Neal, If the property owners really expect to be paid on a regular basis, how can sit on an empty store front for over three years. There should be penalties for having store fronts empty for too long.
Harlan Consider
3:01 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Gene, we have empty storefronts because the economy is in the crapper. I have no doubt that the building owners would rather receive something rather than nothing each month, but with banks, restaurants, and hair/nail/spa pretty much maxed out, being able to attract retailers into these empty storefronts is very hard.
What kind of Soviet style central planning school did you go to? Fining the building owners for empty spaces?? Why not fine hownowners for not being able to find rental tenants?
Gene Callaghan
3:17 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Neal, No need to get angry. I agree fining is a little extreme. What doesn't make sence is that the building owners in Ridgewood are not bringing their price down to reflect the current economy, which is good old American supply and demand. Explain why the landlords are not changing the price lower in this market. I can name a bunch of stores where the rent went up.
henry seamon
6:08 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Gene, The market place determines the prices and available. All landlords want there stores rented.We don't need empty stores in Ridgewood. We need comerce.
Gene Callaghan
6:17 am on Wednesday, September 28, 2011
They want them rented at 2007 prices. Sorry, I think the landlords are out of touch and lack the vision to be more involved in downtown planning.
henry seamon
9:40 am on Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Hey Gene, Landlords pay taxes, if they can aford to pay them and want to wait to get there price, thats there right. This is the U.S.A. not China.
Gene Callaghan
3:25 pm on Wednesday, September 28, 2011
It's our town and I would like to see a town that is not full of Banks and Salons.
Steve
8:46 am on Saturday, November 5, 2011
Bravo, Gene. Wish more residents had your understanding of this issue.
jane shinozuka
12:27 pm on Sunday, November 6, 2011
Gene is right about the preservation of diverse kinds of businesses downtown. It's indeed very important and would be the ideal scenario. I think many, many residents feel the same way. But it's a waste of time to talk about the landlords' decisions to hold out for high rents - that's their right even if it's ill-advised. What we need to do as a community is develop a strategy to revitalize the retail and service business aspect of the CBD. Is that vision still feasible?, how can we attract them?, what businesses are residents likely to patronize?, etc. It's lovely to think of a more old-fashioned sort of downtown. However, the reality is that numerous empty storefronts are clearly a detriment to our streetscape and at some point begin to reflect the perception of the vitality of the village in general.
Bill Connor
6:32 pm on Sunday, November 6, 2011
Turn a negative into a big positive in the north side of the CBD- get a boutique or first class Hotel management investment company to build a reasonably Sized and appropriate Hotel where the Bank of America relic stands and create new and positive business for exisiting smallbusinesses and restaurants and create new tax revenues levies on the enterprise- its near the train station and close enought to
17 and 208 access to be a success- I know this might be seen as hericy - we have a multi mission dollar train station across the street and any kind of restaurant or supporting business in the CSB...