Posted on 4 Comments

Fiscal impact of Ridgewood High Density Housing must be Considered

parking CBD fullhouse theridgewoodblog.net
NOVEMBER 13, 2015    LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2015, 12:31 AM

Consensus can be reached on issue

To the Editor:

I believe wide areas of consensus that currently exist coming out of the Planning Board process for higher density family housing provides hope that we all will be able to do the right thing. Consensus can reach 100 percent if we address the shared fiscal impact which has not yet been considered because, according to our village planner, the Planning Board was precluded from taking it into consideration.

We are all rightfully entitled to develop and invest in private property in Ridgewood. The planning process, while fully transparent to the lawyers involved, was a convoluted community management practice that left out the very simple moral difference between right and wrong. Our free market affords a range of business practices, but one’s profits shouldn’t be realized by increasing the tax burden of every other member of the community they belong to.

We know that every added school-aged resident entering Ridgewood costs more to educate than any family pays in taxes. And, that every town in America has a socialized educational system that distributes the costs of educating some of our residents amongst all. As a parent of three children, I am acutely aware of this since private tuition could easily cost me six times my current tax contribution to the education budget.

We also know that Ridgewood’s ratings on the Internet are the No. 1 reason people move here, but less obvious is that our special education programs, having been labeled “centers of excellence,” draw families to our town as well. The proposed apartments not only appeal to anyone with a child, but they are an ideal environment in which to raise a subset of special needs children for whom living in a detached home is potentially dangerous.

Because of these realities, not “projections,” the negative impact of higher density on our taxes is undeniable. The only question is by how much. It is simply wrong for a select few to leverage our socialized education system to guarantee themselves a business profit on the backs of every one of their tax-paying neighbors. We might easily reach consensus were developers to create an escrow account to reimburse the Board of Education for the cost of educating every new child they bring into town, but I doubt projected profits would allow it.

A simpler way would be for all of us to do the right thing by the one group of our residents who are not being currently accommodated. We can limit apartments to a 55-and-over demographic in order to provide for the current demand for empty-nester housing in town and attract retirees seeking the superior quality of life that our idyllic village setting provides at a stone’s throw from New York City. It’s a no brainer, its fair, and it will bring down taxes for us all.

Martin Walker

Ridgewood

https://www.northjersey.com/opinion/opinion-letters-to-the-editor/ridgewood-news-letter-consensus-can-be-reached-on-issue-1.1454576

Posted on 9 Comments

Parking Vote and the Renege

fly-on-wall_theridgewoodblog

…the fly has learned that many residents voted in favor of the parking garage , giving the council the benefit of the doubt as a result of the Village Council agreement to do in depth studies on the High Density Housing proposed for the central business district at the September 30th Council meeting in addition to the assurances that residents would have input into design etc. It now appears that the council majority is attempting to renege on that deal …

Posted on 1 Comment

Planning Board continues reexam of Ridgewood master plan

clock_cbd_theridgewoodblog

NOVEMBER 12, 2015    LAST UPDATED: THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 2015, 12:48 PM
BY MARK KRULISH
STAFF WRITER |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS

The village’s Planning Board forged on with its reexamination of Ridgewood’s master plan last Tuesday with a discussion that focused on its circulation and community facilities plan.

With an early February deadline to submit a complete master plan reexamination, the board voted unanimously to include the village planner’s recommendations in the draft version of the report with final determination to be made prior to adoption.

One of the recommendations made by Village Planner Blais Brancheau was the establishment of a Transportation Improvement District (TID) in Ridgewood, which would allow the village to allocate the cost of roadway improvements to areas of development in town based on the property’s use. The board also asked for the Complete Streets program previously adopted by the Village Council to be included in the report.

In discussing the current circulation and community facilities plan with the board, Brancheau said he was “struck” by how outdated they are and said both are in need of a major overhaul.

Brancheau suggested the board could decide to do away with the respective elements altogether as they are not mandated by the state and some municipalities have no such elements in their master plan.

https://www.northjersey.com/news/planners-continue-master-plan-reexam-1.1454175

Posted on 21 Comments

Residents Dismayed over Village Council Attempt to Renege on High Density Housing Impact Studies

3 amigos

November 10,2015
the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ, “We’ll see…” was Mayor Paul Aronsohn’s answer when asked about the the September 30th agreed to studies . The Mayor did at lest confirm his commitment to the Financial Impact Study.Residents felt betrayed and reminded the council that you cannot renege on any of the approved studies and maintain our trust.  Residents deserve and demand the comprehensive overlook you voted for before you consider any sweeping  changes to the Central Business District.

At the Monday night meeting several of the Council Members indicated that they could not recall exactly what they voted on, and “committed” to, on September 30th before an audience of hundreds of residents.  The video and Heather Mailander’s clarification of the motion immediately before the vote from the September 30th meeting set the record straight :

It is clear that ALL Councilmembers were fully aware of the motion put to the vote and  all parties were given the opportunity for further clarification, prior to the vote.

The Vote then occurred as follows:

Heather Mailander:  “So this is the amended version which we just read which is multiple studies.  Traffic and infrastructure study, financial study and the school impact study.  And it’s a comprehensive traffic study as outlined by Councilwoman Knudsen: CBD, surrounding neighborhoods, entire Village.  Correct?  Okay.  So that’s the motion on the floor.  Any more discussion?

Susan Knudsen:   “And that would be to table everything until this?”
Heather Mailander:  “Correct, correct.”

The vote, was then taken with the following result:

Hauck:  Yes
Knudson:  Yes
Pucciarelli:  No
Sedon:  Yes
Aronsohn:  Yes

It could not be clearer as to what the Council voted on. The council committed to multiple studies.  a comprehensive traffic study and infrastructure study, financial study and the school impact study. That’s now what residents require .

Residents clearly indicated that they need a better answer than,  “We’ll see.”  The High Density development issue is simply too big of an issue ,fundamentally changing the nature of the Village of Ridgewood forever.

Posted on 12 Comments

Pending projects in Ridgewood call for compromise

20151022_115458

Calling for compromise

OCTOBER 23, 2015    LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2015, 12:31 AM
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS
Print

Calling for compromise

To the Editor:

Pending projects in Ridgewood call for compromise.

1. Development in the Central Business District: So many people have weighed in on this issue and the overwhelming majority want to scale back the proposed housing density change from 35 units per acre to approximately 24, when 12 is currently allowed. At a low estimate of 800 total people speaking out at recent meetings, sending emails and signing petitions, multiplied by 20 (a standard political statistic for surveying public opinion), 16,000 people spoke against the higher density change.

That number represents just about every adult resident living in town. This is a mandate. No further discussion is needed. The council should take the vote off the table and revise the resolutions.

2. Parking Garage: The projected costs are huge and people are concerned. Former Mayor Pat Mancuso suggested two parking tiers at several locations throughout the CBD. Many thought this was a great idea.

This solution would be much easier to manage and possibly a benefit to those wishing to park a bit closer to their destination.

3. Schedler: This is not the place for a 90-foot baseball diamond. The neighborhood will be adversely affected for a multitude of reasons including its close proximity to Route 17. The integrity of the historical house is in jeopardy and we lose 4.5 acres of woods.

Friends of Schedler are in favor of a smaller field which will allow for the trees to be saved and protect the house with meaningful land abutting it. A playground similar to the one at Ridge School would be a wonderful addition for all of Ridgewood’s children. It is the right thing to do and the most practical.

In addition, I believe the compost facility should be considered as a location for the larger baseball field. The facility had been problematic and the neighbors might prefer a playing field. The site is level on land we own, it is on the west side of town, convenient to get to and we don’t have to remove acres of trees.

I also propose hiring additional people in the Shade Tree Division, which has been decimated over the years, and get back in the business of planting and maintaining our trees. We moved here for the schools, the town and the trees.

Linda McNamara

Ridgewood

https://www.northjersey.com/opinion/opinion-letters-to-the-editor/ridgewood-news-letter-calling-for-compromise-1.1439342

Posted on Leave a comment

Ridgewood Planning Board accelerates master plan reexamination

clock_cbd_theridgewoodblog

OCTOBER 12, 2015    LAST UPDATED: MONDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2015, 9:41 AM
BY MARK KRULISH
STAFF WRITER |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS

With just a few months remaining to complete and adopt its state-mandated master plan reexamination report, village officials acknowledged the need to accelerate the process and tackled its next subject at last Tuesday’s Planning Board meeting.

The master plan reexamination report, which is an evaluation of a municipality’s master plan and its development regulations, is required to be undertaken by the Planning Board at least every 10 years. Ridgewood’s reexamination report is due in early February 2016.

With Planning Board meetings often dominated by higher-profile topics, such as the multifamily housing hearings, which wrapped in June, the reexamination has appeared sparingly on board agendas this year.

Village Planner Blais Brancheau expressed his opinion to the board that, due to the compressed timeframe, a “minimum requirement” examination be completed to satisfy state requirements before delving in depth into the numerous issues that need to be addressed.

“I think it’s important we get this adopted,” Brancheau said. “It’s not intended to limit discussion. We can continue discussion once we’ve adopted the reexamination. In fact, it’s my personal feeling a number of sections of the master plan really should be updated and we’ll get into that more as we move forward.”

If Ridgewood fails to meet the state’s deadline, it will be opened up to possible exposure in a legal challenge involving the village’s regulations.

In litigation, a village’s regulations are presumed valid and the litigant bears the burden of proof to show otherwise. Without a properly adopted reexamination report, the burden shifts to the village, said Brancheau.

Chairman Charles Nalbantian asked if the board could simply note, as part of the reexamination report, where the areas in the master plan are that warrant in-depth work.

https://www.northjersey.com/news/board-accelerates-reexam-process-1.1430654

Posted on 5 Comments

Another Front Has Opened Up against Over Development in Ridgewood

DSCF6481

photo by Boyd Loving

Another Front Has Opened Up against Over Development in Ridgewood

October 11,2015
the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ, Another Front Has Opened Up against in what the majority of residents perceive as the over development and urbanization of Ridgewood .Last week signs began to appear the Zabriskie Schedler House, more commonly now called Schedler Park or Schedler field  .

DSCF3490

The Schedler property boarders Route 17 north in a very quite residential neighborhood cornered between Route 17 and Saddle river.The most notable feature, of the property is the 1830s-style Dutch wood frame home, which historians have dated the construction of the home’s main section to the 1830s, though the existing kitchen wing might have predated 1825. The four separate parcels at the Schedler tract were also the site to a Revolutionary War battle and have yielded artifacts from that time.

The RBSA has been pushing for a baseball field in the location since before the property was purchased by the Village in 2009. In 2014 the RBSA sponsored candidate Residents James Albano ran for Village Council with the express purpose of pushing a baseball field in the location . Albano was crushed by a landslide loss in a council election that featured a “mysterious” email to Candidate Michael Sedon employer at the time in an attempt to pressure Sendon to drop out.

386780 373501929386933 1672937995 n

L- R: Isabella Altano from Ridgewood Eastside Development (RED) shows the map of the proposed sports field to Freeholder John Mitchell. Aug 15 2012

In 2012 after another historic home was torn down in Paramus , the site caught the eye of Bergen County Freeholder Maura DeNicola, and Bergen County Freeholder John Mitchell who met with then Ridgewood Village Manager Ken Gabbert, Village Historian Joseph Suplicki and Freeholder Robert Hermansen to discuss the Zabriskie/Schedler house .

A grassroots organization was formed called Ridgewood Eastside Development (RED) in an attempt to protect the neighborhood and preserve the area with some alternative modest development , but mostly the focus at the time was on land making the property and preserving the trees and open space .

The council majority Paul Aronsohn, Albert Pucciarelli ,Gwenn Hauck aka the 3 amigos have as usual ignored the wishes of the vast majority of Ridgewood residents and sided with developers and special interests . https://theridgewoodblog.net/ridgewood-s-schedler-park-maps-and-information/

Posted on 1 Comment

the Fly was just wondering

fly-on-wall

….Several weeks back it was posted  on the blog  that  the grass roots group Citizens for a Better Ridgewood had filed suit against the Village of Ridgewood and or The Ridgewood Planning Board to stop the change in the master plan for the CBD. The Fly has since learned that no one at Village Hall has any knowledge or has been served  with the paperwork . Can someone enlighten the Fly on where the law suit stands?

Posted on 3 Comments

Reader say with a new council in May and I believe it will be a golden opportunity to repeal ordinance 3066

clock_cbd_theridgewoodblog

Agree, so much of the division in town now is due to Pfund’s folly and the desperate attempt to let Valley quickly get its expansion in.

Step by step, building by building, we can re-make our downtown without Pfund’s folly. Contrary to the ravings of a few at this week’s hearing, Ridgewood’s finest hour will not pass simply because we proceed in a logical, organized fashion to constructing a downtown that lasts into the next century without dragging down the rest of the Village.

Mr. Kotch is right, we may be looking at a new council in May and I believe it will be a golden opportunity to repeal ordinance 3066. How anyone thought it was a good idea to allow ” interested parties” to request changes to the Master Plan is a mystery. Who can be seen as more interested than the village residents? We are now forced to be viligent and ready to assemble in order to protect Ridgewood from misguided development.

From the Patch May 2,2012
Conflict with ‘H-Zone’ ordinance and planning board amendment

Although the , the saga continues. The planning board’s amendment to the Master Plan remains on the books and a future council could simply overturn the November vote.

Councilman Paul Aronsohn said it’s time for the planning board to rescind . “We need a blank piece of paper,” Aronsohn said. “It’s time to move on, it’s time to move forward…the mayor and council needs to step up.”

This whole nightmare can be reversed. Elections for three council seats, Hauk, Aronshon, and Pucciarelli, are on May 10th, 2016. That’s in 220 days. It’s time for a slate of candidates, whose platform is to repeal ordinance 3066 which among other things added Chapter 190, Article XIV, Section 143 allowing “interested parties” to amend the master plan.

https://goo.gl/YuUZUt

https://stopvalley.com/Minutes/2007-08-07%20Ordinance%203066.pdf

Posted on 17 Comments

Readers say time Repeal “Pfunds Folly” ordinance 3066!

clock_cbd_theridgewoodblog

We have former Mayor and now appointed local judge Pfund to thank. Without Ordinance 3066, passed purposely in July 2007 when many residents were down the shore, applications to amend the Master Plan would never have even been considered. Then the developers used an old anchoring by applying for 50 units, only to say they’d “comprised” down to 35. The anchor number used should have been the 12 in the Master Plan, and they should have comprised at 18-24, reflecting current Village densities. Development is surely need in the CBD – it’s an eyesore with too much dead space and decaying remnants of the past – but Ordinance 3066 and the 50 number should have never happened in the first place. That’s Pfund’s folly…. These wheels have been in motion since 2007

I had little hope going into last night’s meeting. I am so proud of everyone who came and stood up for our village. Bottom line, we have to repeal ordinance 3066. Also, say no to ordinances requesting our Master Planner. Our Master Plan should be treated with the respect it deserves. It has been in place for decades, protecting our village from the potential high density developments that are on the table now. Should development occur, yes, but within the safeguards of the master plan. Developers: get a variance and if appropriate for Ridgewood it will pass. If the densities are to low for your project and potential profits, to bad, come to the table with something else. But don’t threaten residents with statements “if you don’t give us this, we’ll do something you really won’t like”. That is not neighborly or nice.

We should have been signing petitions to repeal Ordinance 3066 five years ago or more. I agree that 35 units is too high, but that’s because developers are allowed to submit proposals to amend the Master Plan under Ordinance 3066 (passed by then Mayor Pfund under cover of July summer vacations in 2007 to help out his pals at Valley), and its easy to anchor the debate initially at 50 units and then say you’ve “compromised down to 35 units even though the initial anchoring of the discussion should have been at 12 units as per the existing Master Plan.

Posted on 9 Comments

Citizens for a Better Ridgewood : Recap of Wednesday’s High Density Housing Meeting

Village Council Meeting

photo by Boyd Loving

Editors note : Great job to the Citizens for a Better Ridgewood but we would like to point out the it is an Elected Officials JOB to listen to their constituents concerns , council members do not need to be thanked because it took 500 screaming residents to show up to a Village Council meeting to pay attention to obvious short comings in their misguided efforts to transform Ridgewood into Hoboken .

Hello Friends and Neighbors!

We would like to thank each and every one of you!
Thank you for sending emails to Village Council members and for showing up at Wednesday night’s meeting.  Hundreds and hundreds of concerned residents came to Village Hall!  Many of you not only showed up, but you waited on line, spoke at the podium and stayed late into the night. Your comments were thoughtful and heartfelt.  We are grateful for your passion and support.

Council Tables The Vote and Orders New Studies
The meeting lasted 5.5 hours and 76 residents took to the podium, almost all in favor of housing but at a lower density level.  At 11:00 pm, council members began discussing whether or not to continue the public hearing to another date, as it was already late into the evening.   Councilman Michael Sedon made a motion to table the ordinances until a fiscal impact study could be done, which would help determine the effects the new apartment buildings would have on the tax base.  Councilwoman Susan Knudsen seconded the motion, and asked that a comprehensive traffic study and school impact study also be completed.

These are three important studies that were never conducted at the Planning Board level.  The Planning Board is not allowed to consider fiscal or educational impacts in decision-making. Although this seems unreasonable, it is common practice throughout municipalities everywhere.  The financial and school-related considerations are left to elected officials, who have the final word and who are presumably much more in touch with the public at large.

Some traffic studies were conducted at the Planning Board level. However, the studies were specific to each proposed development and only addressed the traffic effects at individual each site. The studies never addressed the cumulative effects that developing all of these sites at the same time, while also adding a parking garage and an assisted living facility, would have on traffic in downtown Ridgewood.  Similarly, the analyses that were done at the Planning Board level to estimate the number of school-aged children that may be added to our school district if hundreds of apartments were to be built, were based on data from other towns in the state of NJ, but not towns with school districts comparable to the Ridgewood Public School system.

Mayor Paul Aronsohn agreed with the need for further studies and voted yes with Sedon and Knudsen.  Councilwoman Gwen Hauck initially expressed concern about the additional cost and time needed to complete studies, but she ultimately went along and voted to approve the studies.  Deputy Mayor Pucciarelli was the only one to vote no at the time, because he was intent on finishing the process of public comment before taking any action.  Once public comment was finished, Mr. Pucciarelli appeared supportive of further studies.

Next Steps
The Public Hearings have been continued until Monday, November 9th, with the hope that the new studies will be completed in a timely manner.   We are thankful that our Village Council is moving forward with these additional studies, and it appears as if democracy has prevailed. Now it is up to you to continue to show up to the meetings.  As the process continues, residents will be able to listen to the experts and question them as well.  This is your opportunity to fully participate and have a stake in how our village moves forward.  Please continue to stay engaged!

Final Note
We encourage you to reach out to your council members to thank them for hearing us and for agreeing to continue the process with further studies.  We continue, as always, to encourage respectful and thoughtful dialogue!

If you know of any one who would like to receive CBR emails and notifications of upcoming meetings, please tell them to email us [email protected] and put “Add me to Email List” in the subject line.

Thank you again for all of your support!!

Citizens for a Better Ridgewood
[email protected]

Posted on 16 Comments

Vote on Ridgewood multifamily housing put on hold

Village Council Special Public Meeting

OCTOBER 1, 2015    LAST UPDATED: THURSDAY, OCTOBER 1, 2015, 5:23 PM
BY MARK KRULISH
STAFF WRITER |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS

Plans to take a final vote on the ordinances that would rezone four parcels of land in downtown Ridgewood for multifamily housing were put on hold as the council decided to commission more studies on the impact of the potential resulting projects.

Wednesday was set to be the final public hearing on the five ordinances and hundreds of residents turned out to hear the council’s decision. Those packed into the council chambers displayed signs and often erupted in applause after a speaker voiced opposition to the amendments. Reaction was similar in the crowded overflow rooms on the first floor where the public watched via live stream on projectors.

Deep into the evening, members of the council intervened to request more studies and analysis, echoing the call of many speakers who believed the governing body had not done its due diligence.

Between speakers, the council broke off into a discussion about possibly continuing the public hearing at another meeting since it was already past 11 p.m. and many residents were still on line waiting to speak.

The discussion resulted in Councilman Michael Sedon officially putting forth a motion to have a financial study on the impact of the new developments in the Central Business District, particularly in regards to the effects new apartment buildings would have on the tax base.

Councilwoman Susan Knudsen seconded the motion, asking Sedon to amend the motion to allow for a traffic study along with an impact study on the downtown area as a whole, to which Sedon agreed. As the discussion ensued further, infrastructure and school impact studies were also included in the motion.

Mayor Paul Aronsohn and Councilwoman Gwenn Hauck joined Sedon and Knudsen, voting in favor of having the studies done and continuing the public hearings to Monday, Nov. 9.

https://www.northjersey.com/news/ridgewood-council-holds-off-on-vote-1.1423164

Posted on 39 Comments

Village Council Tables Vote on High Density Housing

Village Council Tables Vote on High Density Housing
all photos by Boyd Loving
October 1,2015

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ , A huge turn out filled the the courtroom last night with some estimates saying there was another 300 people in the rooms downstairs watching it on the TV’s.It seems the people were finally heard. The council voted 4-1 (Al Pucciarelli the only no vote) to continue the hearings and conduct impact studies on the fiscal impacts, traffic (a comprehensive study that would include all off the proposed buildings as well as the 2 parking garages and the 98 unit assisted living facility), and schools.

 The resistance to the over development and urbanization was spearheaded by the Citizens for a Better Ridgewood . The group is  non-profit with a mission to make sure development is achieved within the character of Ridgewood.

They are in favor of development that compliments our existing CBD. “Our town has been reacting for far too long. It is time for a shared vision, a comprehensive plan that allows for extensive community input and can move us forward.”

DSCF6205 1

The council has postponed the vote on the ordinances to increase the density from 12 to 35 until those studies have been done. The next meeting will be held Monday, November 9th. Many people left because it just ran too late so If you want your chance to speak Nov 9th, you will be able to.

Reader said , “Partial victory tonight… tabled the vote! However the real solution here is to roll back the “Valley Hospital inspired” master plan changes which allowed these ordinances even be proposed in the first place.”

DSCF6184

Posted on 14 Comments

Aronsohn accepted campaign contribution from developer

aronsohn_070512_rn_tif_

file photo by Boyd Loving

October 1,2015

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ, An individual candidate’s report from the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission’s website reveals that during his 2008 campaign for Village Council, Ridgewood Mayor Paul Aronsohn accepted an “In Kind” contribution of $383.92 from local real estate developer John Saracino.  The “In Kind” contribution was made in the form of a candidate’s reception.

An ordinance that would essentially approve Mr. Saraceno’s high density multi-family housing project, “The Enclave,” is currently being considered by Mayor Aronsohn and the Village Council.

Does the acceptance of the noted campaign contribution indicate a conflict of interest exists on Mayor Aronsohn’s part?

https://www.elec.state.nj.us/ELECReport/SearchCandidate.aspx

ELEC_Document (1)

Posted on 9 Comments

VILLAGE COUNCIL SPECIAL PUBLIC MEETING TONIGHT SEPTEMBER 30, 2015 7:30 P.M.

Village Council

file photo by Boyd Loving

NOTICE: Village Council Meeting – September 30, 2015

NOTICE – VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 30, 2015 – The doors of the Sydney V. Stoldt, Jr. Courtroom of the Ridgewood Village Hall will open at 7:00 p.m. on September 30, 2015 for the Village Council’s Work Session and Special Public Meeting. If the Courtroom is filled, overflow seating will be provided on the first floor of the Ridgewood Village Hall with audiovisual equipment available to see and hear the meeting. All members of the public wishing to speak will be given an opportunity to do so.