August 22
...serving up your daily dish.
The woeful tale of a Montclair couple and the Gray Street McMansion that ate their neighborhood recently made it into the real estate section of the New York Post.
Take the recent case of a Montclair, N.J., neighborhood. Trouble began when Rica Enterprises, headed by developer Manny Rica of Kearny, built a new 3,300-square-foot home on a street of older houses roughly half that size. The house fully conformed to the town's zoning regulations.
While Rica might have followed the letter of the law, the spirit, neighbors have suggested, is another matter. "The developer was just in there to get the money," claims Elizabeth Thatcher, who lives next door to the 3,300-square-foot home. "He was just in there to make the house as big and as bad as possible. He just wanted to get the top dollar for it.
"The house looks nothing like anything else on our street. Nothing. It's totally out of place. It's hideous, and it's massive."
Neighbor Donna Minnicozzi agrees. "It's this giant faux-brick, faux-stucco house, when almost all the homes here are Victorian or Colonial," she says.
"We have 17 windows facing our house now," she says. "It's like always being under observation."
Or, as professor Megan Laverty, another resident living in the new structure's shadow, puts it, "It gives one the feeling that one is in their backyard. They've, in a sense, appropriated everyone else's backyard as their own because of the size."
Meanwhile, the new owners left a comment here, days before the Post story broke.
waaaahhhhh!!!!!
give me a break.
Posted by: Left Of Center, like Suzanne Vega | Aug 22, 2005 12:30:26 PM
you're kidding - the developer was in it for the money? I can't believe it.
Posted by: adr | Aug 22, 2005 12:59:53 PM
So the house doesn't look like others? Well, in many areas that might be seen as all to the good. Adding architectural interest and some texture to the block.
As for those 17 windows which Ms. Minicozzi seems to find menacing, that's what curtains, drapes and blinds are for, no?
It was just silly, however, for someone to claim that the house somehow "appropriates" everyone else's backyard. It doesn't sound quite as silly coming from an academic since academics regularly say so many wildly silly things, but she too really should have known better.
And imagine how annoyed those same idly sputtering Daffy Duck-types on Gray Street might be if their new neighbor also puts a "Forrester For Governor" sign out on the front lawn.
Posted by: cathar | Aug 22, 2005 2:36:47 PM
Correct me if I am wrong but isn't it better to have the least expensive house on the block than the other way around (the theory being that the other, more expensive houses, will bring up the value of your home)?
Posted by: Miss Martta | Aug 22, 2005 3:00:37 PM
Getting a McMansion in your backyard is a tough break. Especially when the developer followed all the zoning laws.
But it could have been worse.
The Crescent/Trinity Place neighborhood got a McBuilding (8 floors) in their backyards with something like several hundred windows getting a good look at their daily activities. Several years of disruption during construction is just the icing on the cake.
We wish the developers in our area had to follow the zoning laws. Our elected officials, spear-headed by Mayor Ed Remsen and Deputy Mayor Joyce Michaelson, sold us out by changing the zoning laws to benefit developers. The developers got away with something like 40 extra condos, two extra floors in height and half as many required commercial parking spaces. And, they threw in a tax break.
As you can see, things could always be worse. I guess Gray Street could have gotten a McBuilding and we could have gotten a skyscraper.
Garrett Morrison
18 Trinity Place
Posted by: Garrett Morrison | Aug 22, 2005 5:20:42 PM
Cathar, Left-of-Center. etc.,
I would first like to say that we love our new neighbors on Grey Street and find them to be quite wonderfully down-to-earth people.
Please forgive us for trying to bring this nation-wide issue to light here in Montclair. You all need to know that we made no effort to search out the media. We did not hawk our story to the Montclair Times, the New York Post, the Associated Press, Inside Edition nor ABC's Nightline...they contacted us and we shared with them our concerns in the hopes that others might not have to go through this same ordeal.
I trust that all of you care about your neighborhood and your community at large. To make fun of others just to make yourself feel better is understandable but really adds nothing helpful to the matter at hand.
If there was a matter that was greatly bothering you would you want others to laugh at, cast aspersions about, mock and deride you? I think not. So what have you done other than to make others consider you something less than sensitive and caring towards your fellow human?
If you have something more you would like to know about this issue than feel free to contact me. I will be happy to help inform you so that you can know what is going on here and better make decisions as our city's boards and committees deal with such matters as Floor Area Ratio, set-backs, etc.
Let me conclude by saying though we may find a great deal to object about regarding this house we can honestly say we thoroughly enjoy our new neighbors and are happy to have them in our midst.
Respectfully,
Michael King
35 Harvard Street
Posted by: Michael King | Aug 23, 2005 7:22:22 PM
It is time for the township of Montclair to establish a code/committee similar to the one in Glen Ridge that maintains and preserves the historical character of the community.
How many Marboro Inns must be destroyed before the township wakes up!
And to think that the Mayor and some members of the town council are part of the "Corporatization of Montclair" is outrageous.
I thought our elected officials were supposed to represent ALL THE PEOPLE!
Naive me!
Posted by: Franklin | Aug 23, 2005 9:44:57 PM
Michael King's posting above, however earnest-sounding, is somewhat surprising. After one's snarled at the size of a neighbor's new domicile, after all, it's somewhat late in the game to add that they're such nice people anyway. They may well be, but publicly stated complaints about the size and congruence of their home will certainly play hob with the further "enjoyment" of both neighborly pleasantries or red velvet cakes in the future.
Posted by: cathar | Aug 24, 2005 9:14:45 AM
Franklin:
What exactly does "corporatization" mean? We have, by the way, passed ordinances that will restrict the height and mass of buildings in residential zones and the issue will be further addressed in the Master Plan;and we do have a Historic Preservation Commission which is constantly advancing ideas regarding preservation of buildings, commercial areas and at-risk areas like Pine Street; we have just requested that the Planning Board "raise the bar" as to conditions for expansion of schools in residential neighborhoods because of the potential impact of large expansions by private schools; I have aksed the HPC to advance a list of buildings like the Georgian Inn for consideration as landmarks because many of these sites are "in play" by the owners.
How can every decision by any Council possibly represent everyone's opinion in a town as philosophically diverse as Montclair?
Ed Remsen
Posted by: Ed Remsen | Aug 24, 2005 4:30:24 PM
Franklin:
What exactly does "corporatization" mean? We have, by the way, passed ordinances that will restrict the height and mass of buildings in residential zones and the issue will be further addressed in the Master Plan;and we do have a Historic Preservation Commission which is constantly advancing ideas regarding preservation of buildings, commercial areas and at-risk areas like Pine Street; we have just requested that the Planning Board "raise the bar" as to conditions for expansion of schools in residential neighborhoods because of the potential impact of large expansions by private schools; I have asked the HPC to advance a list of buildings like the Georgian Inn for consideration as landmarks because many of these sites are "in play" by the owners.
How can every decision by any Council possibly represent everyone's opinion in a town as philosophically diverse as Montclair?
Ed Remsen
Posted by: Ed Remsen | Aug 24, 2005 4:31:10 PM
Mr. Mayor,
You should also try to save the Farrell Building on Valley Road. It will have a 100th Birthday in 2006 and there have been rumors that local politicians have sacrificed it's future.
Garrett Morrison
18 Trinity Place
Posted by: Garrett Morrison | Aug 24, 2005 10:06:58 PM
The Farrell Building is owned by DCH Motors and is in-between two of their main buildings. It is not in the historic district and at some point will likely be part of a renovation of the dealership.
Posted by: Ed Remsen | Aug 25, 2005 5:29:24 PM
Hi all,
I was turned onto this site by a friend of 30 years who also grew up in the montclair area. I love reading all this stuff, being removed for 15 years now.
This recent issue of McMansions I have to comment on! Montclair is know for the incredible architecture and uniquness of each house, NO COOKIE CUTTER houses to be found there. How refreshing! It is also know for it's diversity, something most that live there don't see. One of those things that you need to leave to appreciate.
I can only warn you that, living in Chatham now i should know, once you start knocking down and tearing apart neighborhoods (older, incredibly beautiful homes) you lose so much beauty and that hometown feel. I still visit Montclair and show my kids what a wonderful town it is and how wonderful it was to grow up there. I would hate to drive thru Montclair and feel like I never left Chatham. There is too much character to Montclair to let it fall victim to developers! Now...
We don't live in montclair 'cause who could afford the taxes???? LOL
Posted by: Cathy | Aug 25, 2005 10:09:02 PM
Mr. Mayor,
Thanks for the information.
But why wasn't the Farrell Building included in the Historic District? Everything near it seems to be included.
The Farrell Building has that historic character that Montclair people would like to preserve. Maybe you can try and save it like the Georgian Inn before DCH Motors does something silly.
I'm sure you don't want to be known as the Demolition Mayor/
Posted by: Garrett Morrison | Aug 26, 2005 11:42:46 AM
never been lumped in with cathar before...that's a new one.
anyway, call me libertarian.
whoever owns the property should be able to do what they want with it.
sometimes, that's gonna suck for the neighbors but...oh well.
deal with it.
and, ed, how can i get my hands on the "Master Plan" (rubbing hands together and bellowing "Mooha ha ha ha ha!")
Posted by: Left Of Center, like Suzanne Vega | Aug 26, 2005 12:02:03 PM
The "Demolition Mayor?" please...
The last Council decided to take the Farrell Building out of the expanded district. We have protected hundreds of buildings up and down Bloomfield Avenue with the original designation and the two subsequent expansions and will now consider a historic district in Upper Montclair.
I have no doubt you'll find some evil intent in almost anything I do if you disagree with it, no matter what the facts.
One of the reasons the municipal portion of your taxes did not go up this year is the increase in ratables in the Town Center. We're trying to balance tax relief with preservation, create parking without overbuilding decks,and create jobs and new businesses while maintaining the eclectic nature of the downtown.
Ed Remsen
Posted by: Ed Remsen | Aug 26, 2005 9:55:22 PM
