the staff of the Ridgewood blog
Ridgewood NJ, according to Village Manager Keith Kazmark ,the Village has received a written response from the New Jersey Department of Transportation, in consultation with the Attorney General’s Office, regarding the Clinton Avenue street closure on days when school is in session. Said response is attached. Highlighted in the letter is the determination which reads, “As such, please note that the Ordinance (allowing Clinton Ave. to be closed to thru traffic) does not have any legal force or effect unless approved by the Commissioner, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 39:4-8(a).” In light of this decision, Clinton Avenue will be open starting on Tuesday, September 3, 2024, which is the first day of school.
The Village Council is scheduled to discuss this matter at the Village Council meeting on Wednesday, September 4, 2024 at 7:30 pm. At said meeting there will be public hearings on both the parking ordinance and the repeal of the street closure ordinance. They will also discuss whether to direct the Engineering Department, the Police Department and the Village Clerk’s Office to prepare the required paperwork for a review of the ordinance by the DOT Commissioner. In the meantime, Chief Lyons will assign ample police officers in the area during the first few days of school to ensure the safety of students and families as we begin the new school year.
Repealing the ordinance does not take place till later this month . By opening the road in advance of a public hearing the Village Council is in a position of violating their own ordinance .
August 27, 2024
Via Email and Regular Mail
Heather A. Mailander
Village Clerk
Village of Ridgewood
131 North Maple Avenue
Ridgewood, NJ 07450
Re: Village of Ridgewood Ordinance No. 3604
Dear Ms. Mailander:
On behalf of the New Jersey Department of Transportation (“NJDOT”), thank you for providing a copy of Village of Ridgewood (“Ridgewood”) Ordinance No. 3604 (“the Ordinance”). In this regard, except as otherwise provided in N.J.S.A. 39:4-8(a), no ordinance, resolution, or regulation concerning, regulating, or governing traffic or traffic conditions, adopted or enacted by
any board or body having jurisdiction over highways, shall be of any force or effect unless the same is approved by the Commissioner of Transportation (“Commissioner”), according to law. The Commissioner shall not be required to approve any such ordinance, resolution, or regulation, unless, after investigation by the Commissioner, the same shall appear to be in the interest of safety
and the expedition of traffic on the public highways. N.J.S.A. 39:4-8(a). The Commissioner’s investigation need not include more than a review of the ordinance, resolution, or regulation, and the supporting documentation submitted by a board or body having jurisdiction over highways, unless the Commissioner determines that additional investigation is warranted. Ibid. As such, please note that the Ordinance does not have any legal force or effect unless approved by the Commissioner, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 39:4-8(a).
To follow up, if Ridgewood wants the Commissioner to consider the Ordinance for approval pursuant to N.J.S.A. 39:4-8(a), please provide a certified copy of the Ordinance to the NJDOT’s Division of Traffic Engineering (“DTE”), to my attention, together with the following: a copy of a certification from Ridgewood’s engineer; a statement of reasons for the Ridgewood
engineer’s decision; detailed information as to the location of streets, intersections, and signs affected by the Ordinance; traffic count, crash, and speed sampling data, if appropriate; and any other information that Ridgewood would like the NJDOT to consider. Additionally, please submit
“IMPROVING LIVES BY IMPROVING TRANSPORTATION”
New Jersey Is An Equal Opportunity Employer • Printed on Recycled and Recyclable Paper
to the DTE any documentation and information regarding appropriate notice that Ridgewood has provided to any adjoining municipality and/or county which the Ordinance may impact. The NJDOT will then perform an investigation and the Commissioner will determine whether or not to approve the Ordinance in accordance with N.J.S.A. 39:4-8(a).
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (609) 963-1769. Sincerely,
Jaime Oplinger
Executive Director
Division of Traffic Engineering
C: Keith Kazmark, Ridgewood Village Manager
Forest Lyons, Ridgewood Chief of Police
Christopher Scales, NJDOT, Chief of Staff
Tell your story #TheRidgewoodblog , #Indpendentnews, #information, #advertise, #guestpost, #affiliatemarketing,#NorthJersey, #NJ , #News, #localnews, #bergencounty, #sponsoredpost, #SponsoredContent, #contentplacement , #linkplacement, Email: Onlyonesmallvoice@gmail.com
Regardless of the fact that NJDOT has determined the local ordinance to be unlawful and unforceable, the Village Council should’ve done the right thing and waited until the public hearing and formal repeal of the ordinance before opening the road up. They think nothing of violating their own ordinances.
You are dealing with Build a wall PFAS Paulie and his bald headed lackey Kaz-shark. You’d better watch out, those waters are choppy.
Supposedly, the sidewalks were built on the west side of the street because they align with the crosswalks on Godwin and West Ridgewood. Is that true? Or were the sidewalks built on the side of the street that Bob Furman doesn’t live on just to please him?
Bob should still have to shovel. When you are used to shoveling shit for Winograd and Vagianos, you might as well keep it going by shoveling where it really counts. C’mon, let’s implement One Village One Shovel.
It was because the residents voted against sidewalks on both sides during meetings.
new sidewalks on Clinton? who makes those decisions and what are the justifications? Does this have anything to do with a resident who posted and was looking for others to join an “action” for the Village to provide walking “access” for an austistic child, -aka sidewalks to enable recreational, social and potential work communting fron the business district? BTW, an online search of Fed ADA regs appears to indicate that there is NO legal obligation to install sidewalks where none exist. Please fact check this. Also an answer to the question as to why “handicapped” ADA compliant, corner cross walks were recently installed (including Belgian Block retaining walls) where NO sidewalks existed along N Monroe and elsewhere ? Was this to spend Fed infrastructure $’s or FED/State ADA grants or part of a
master sidewalk plan? As it stands now a handicapped person in a wheelchair or walker can cross from corner to corner and have no place to go from there?! Would like to see an explanation for these as they’re not req’d under ADA regs without sidewalks and if sidewalks are coming, where is the master plan for same, what are the costs and sources of funding who approves?
Ridgewood is a 99% developed suburban town with significant car traffic on basically every street. Any traffic engineer will tell you that mixing pedestrians and motor vehicles together on roadways is a bad idea. Every street in Ridgewood should have sidewalks.
One Village One Shovel is hilarious. Bumper sticker worthy
Well, with full knowledge that the ordinance was unlawful and unenforceable, is the Village planning to research to determine who got summonses for violating it and return their money?
Woohoo! #FREETHESTREET Get your motors running!
Since ridgewood is really no longer a village but more like a city, there should be sidewalks all over