Posted on

Ridgewood should not settle for average

Clock_Ridgewood_theridgewopodblog.net_-163

Ridgewood should not settle for average

December 6, 2014

To the Editor:

The developers proposing high-density developments have said traffic shouldn’t be an issue and schools would experience minimal increases in enrollment. It appears that they might have succeeded in convincing some of the Planning Board members.

Before accepting developers’ conclusions, we need to decide on a proper analytical framework. To do so, we can employ the elementary concepts of statistics. The developers are showing us the average cases. Traffic should be fine most of the time. Schools should not be incrementally crowded for many of the grades. However, we know this is not the way to look at the problem. Instead of the average, we need to focus on the bottlenecks and the possible extremes the proposed plans could generate.

What the developers are telling us is analogous to a stranger telling us that it’s safe to walk across a lake because the average depth of the lake is five feet. Clearly, this piece of information is insufficient. What we should find out is the maximum depth of the lake, the worst-case scenario.

Using the worst-case framework, we can reach the following conclusions:

High-density development will exacerbate traffic when it counts the most — the commuting hours. These are compact few hours of the day, but the number of people affected and the amount of pain experienced will be exponentially higher.

High-density development will also create overcrowding at certain (not all) grade levels. Moreover, the volatility of student enrollment is likely to rise with ongoing tendency for spikes. Therefore, for students, being impacted by class overcrowding will be based on the luck of the draw.

Given these negative scenarios, why would we want high-density development? How could certain members of the Planning Board possibly think this is a good idea? Why are we playing a treacherous game of three-card Monte with the future of this town?

Steve Kim

Ridgewood

9 thoughts on “Ridgewood should not settle for average

  1. They follow the lead of the three Council members wishes.

  2. These guys get their way and Valley gets theirs, you quickly become well below average.

  3. Over expansion is over expansion. Didn’t we or they learn anything from the correct Valley Hospital decision? Why do we continue to waste time and money on issues that shouldn’t be here to begin with?

    Maybe morons are at the helm here? Stop the nonsense. Here let’s try to inject some logic on this proposal. Please feel free to build on these properties structures that meet current codes and variances. End of discussion. The truth will set you Free!

  4. Steve, residents have been settling for average for years. We pay some of the highest property taxes in the state and yet our public schools are no longer top ten in NJ, we have public officials stealing from us (half a million in quarters was national news), and conflicts of interest with elected officials are allowed to fester. Village Council meetings have become a shrill fest, we’re being sued by our largest local employer, and we have HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS in unfunded pension, healthcare and accumulated leave bonuses to be paid out to our rapidly retiring teachers & public sector workforce. That’s not even average, its subpar. It’s hard to build excellence in the future when all of your focus is on paying past credit card bills.

  5. When does anyone with common sense always believe what a developer would tell them as gospel truth?

  6. It’s time to dig deeper into your big piggy bank #4.

    If I made over $300,000.00 a year I would not be complaining about my $20,000.00 a year property taxes.

  7. Valley/apartments: No-brainer: NO.

    Never before have so many hours, words, and dollars been wasted in this town.

  8. Yes #17 And so many votes wasted on three Council Members.


  9. Anonymous:

    It’s time to dig deeper into your big piggy bank #4.
    If I made over $300,000.00 a year I would not be complaining about my $20,000.00 a year property taxes.

    You’re part of the problem #6, you can’t squeeze blood from a stone. We already pay the highest state + local taxes in America, and you want more because it funds your retirement from age 52. For what ? Seems like the money just goes in to a black hole of average (or worse).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.