November 11, 2006 by vreela1.

Bob here is the rest of the idea that we had talked about that was too long for the letter to the editor:

If we could build some consensus around such a small project, then maybe between the town, school and concerned local groups we could build enough consensus to convince our state legislatures to pressure DOT into building turning lanes in and out of both the school and the Andes property to ease the congestion in the morning. Oh! and maybe a sidewalk on the school side of Route 121 up to the shopping center to improve safety for students and give the seniors who don’t drive access to shopping. Or, maybe we should try and fund the side walk ourselves. And who knows maybe the school would be willing to put some voluntary restrictions on how loud their amplifiers are turn up during sports games. Like maybe to the rules that govern the rest of the town. Kind of like a good neighborly jester to appease some of the more local neighbors. Also maybe we could thing about some kind of economizing when it comes to leaving the field lights on. Like only for competitive team sports? Some people who live near by might want to see the night sky occasionally.

Aren’t the potential fruits of cooperative effort seductive?

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

November 9, 2006 by vreela1.

Historically, there seem to be two ways to insure the defeat of any proposed community project: our tendency to want it ALL in any project being proposed; or presenting proposals that undermines the sanctity of our economically-gated community.

Examples of the first would be the school’s original 50 million dollar bond issue defeated in 2001. Originally, the goal was to accommodate demographic increases at JJMS & JJHS. However the initial bond was defeated, because it tried to include everybody’s wish list for every school along with the kitchen sink. And let us not forget the quiet death of the Herzog Team’s proposal to build a $14 million Town Hall to solve an ADA compliance issue.

Another problem with over-scaled projects is there need for outside funding, which is then immediately exploited by the NIMBYs as an invitation to bring in the feared “others” to our economically-gated community. Examples are recent attempts to use Legacy Funds for ball fields, or the past attempt by one town administration to build an ice rink which would have been paid for, in part, by fees from outside hockey players in search of ice time.

For all the divisiveness oversize proposals cause we continue doing the same thing somehow expecting different results. So instead of trying to build one needed hardball field on the already cleared and level Andes property which could double as rectangular field in off-season, those pushing for fields want nothing less then multi-turf, lighted fields, so expensive, to be only affordable with Legacy money. No wonder any neighbor, living near such a proposed project is defensively up in arms, shouting NIMBY, whether they live near Andes or Route 22.

How about a more neighborhood friendly solution? Allow somebody like A-Home to buy the Andes property with county funds in order to build 11 senior housing units. (A-Home already owns a well maintained project in town which I would bet 99% of the residents don’t even know exists) This would reduce the town,s cost for the whole property from say $1.1 million to about $300,000 or even less.

11 units of senior housing, grouped in three cluster homes, of about 3200 sf each would only occupy about 1 acre of the 8 plus acre lot.

As for the rest of the land, the moderates in town could support some field-of-dreams group, coupled with town support and zoning controls, to build one much needed hardball field with a 30 car gravel parking lot on four or five acres. And possibly the town could develop the remaining two acres as planted buffers and possibly a small children’s playground between the two projects. No multi-turf fields! No lights!

Radical! A low key, multigenerational, multiuse project, where everybody gets a LITTLE something. We get some homes for our own seniors, normally forced out of our community by escalating costs, plus an on site senior neighborhood-watch to keep younger mischief makers at bay. We get a needed adult size hardball field.

Create an echo, give us some feed back, here at http.// talk.visions4hope.com/

Jeffrey Vreeland

South Salem, NY

Posted in moderates for small scale development | 2 Comments »

November 7, 2006 by vreela1.

Welcome to vision4hope discussion board! The board is open to all who wish to discuss, talk or other wise engage with their fellows. Check back often for new topics.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »