We are asking for your help this weekend to get the word out about the big vote on Wednesday. The future of our village is at stake.
Come join a group of enthusiastic volunteers TODAY and/or Sunday at 1:00 pm to help pass out flyers and talk to our fellow residents about the importance of showing up for Wednesday’s vote at Village Hall.
Many, many residents have written emails to the Mayor and Council (it’s not too late for you to write, too — see attachment), there were four compelling Letters to the Editor in the paper yesterday (see links below), and our cause has gone viral on Facebook. We have a lot of momentum going into Wednesday’s meeting, and we need all the help we can get to make one final push!!
YOU CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE!
When: Sat/Sun 1pm
Where: Northwest corner of Van Neste Park (Across from Raymond’s)
Why: Because this is the real rent we pay for living in a great democracy and a place like Ridgewood.
If you have kids, please bring them. This is a great opportunity to teach civic engagement.
If you plan to arrive, please email Dana at [email protected] or call 917-685-9056
If you can’t make it but want to be involved, email Dana as well.
Hope to see you out there this weekend — and at the Village Council meeting on WEDNESDAY!!
Schedler and Valley people are tired of fighting and people are confused/think it is over anyway.
I am not one of those three but I will tell you this, the worst way to reduce taxes is to have high density housing that is not age restricted. The absolute worst. Actually no, the worst is that they are tricking seniors/empty nesters into believing that this is for them, if it were they would be age restricted. Fact is one of the developers admitted there is not enough market for empty nesters to even get a loan for that purpose so they are well aware that the demand is not there. The apartments will be filled with the people who always move to towns with good schools, young families who use services at a rate much higher than seniors.
So our beautiful town will not only be more congested but you will pay more for it.
Just so we’re completely TRANSPARENT about factors driving the garage project, Paul Vagianos, President of the Ridgewood Chamber of Commerce, owns & operates a restaurant located within 1 block of the proposed garage AND owns a commercial building located immediately next to the proposed garage. Mr. Vagianos is currently running for State Assembly in the 40th District. The vote yes for parking signs are generally accompanied by signs supporting Mr. Vagianos’ candidacy.
DO NOT BE HOODWINKED; READ THIS: Despite what proponents of the parking garage say & write, there will be virtually ZERO NET GAIN IN THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. How could this be you ask? Because, by approving the construction of high density housing in the Central Business District, all commuter parking spaces at the old Brogan Cadillac site get wiped out. Furthermore, there are no provisions in any of the high density housing ordinances that would require a developer to construct additional parking for use by the public. To repeat, there will be ZERO NET GAIN IN THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. Don’t be hoodwinked. Vote “NO” on the parking referendum unless you like having your property taxes jacked up needlessly.
Several of the pictured signs were observed on lawns in front of private residences on Ridgewood’s East Side early this morning, including the Mayor’s home on Linwood Avenue and the Deputy Mayor’s home on Cottage Place.
Although the First Amendment of the United States Constitution protects a property owner’s right to display such signs, is it appropriate for both the Mayor and Deputy Mayor to be displaying their respective support for the garage not knowing 1) what the final price tag is, 2) what the design will be, nor 3) how the garage will be funded? In short, they both have little if any factual data about the project, but yet they support it? Duh?
Additionally, what taxpayer funded resources, if any, were used to design, print, and/or distribute these signs? The Mayor mentioned during a recent public meeting how pleased he was that promotional material in support of the referendum was being developed (perhaps an inappropriate comment for an official meeting); did the Village’s contribution to the endeavor stop there, or is there more?
They have zero idea how much taxpayers will be on the hook for this pie in the sky project, but they’re happy to be riding the train out of the station. ALL ABOARD!
As you may or may not know, on September 30th the village council will be continuing the 2 night hearing and voting on the 5 ordinances regarding the high density housing. These ordinances would increase the density allowed from 12 units per acre (current) to 35 units per acre (UPA) in our downtown. Here’s a comparison as to what some other towns in our area allow: Fort Lee 50 UPA, Teaneck 28 UPA, Englewood 12 UPA, Hackensack 22 UPA. If passed, Fort Lee would be the only town in our area, similar in population, with a greater density per acre. I do believe the majority of the town is accepting of development, but on a smaller scale. Maybe 25 units per acre? Do we really want to be built up more than Teaneck? I certainly don’t want to be anywhere near Fort Lee’s density.
The planning board spent approximately 3 years in discussions and 1 1/2 years in a public hearing before voting. The village council had a small portion of their Sept 16 meeting devoted to this and now the council will be coming to the sept 30th meeting with their written statements prepared on how they are voting and why. The Ridgewood News had an editorial last week about “what’s the hurry?”. I have to agree with them. While I don’t want this to drag out, I do want the council to do their due diligence and get all of the facts before they vote. During the Valley hearings at the council level, the council brought in the traffic expert, planner, geotechnical engineer, etc and each council member asked questions of these experts and based their vote on what was discussed at council.
It appears that the majority of the council does not want to bring in any experts. They are ready to vote without asking any questions of any experts as to how this will effect Ridgewood. At the planning board level, a concern about the increase this would bring to our taxes was brought up several times by residents. The discussion was always shot down, because “it is not in the purview of the planning board to consider finances.” In fact, the village planner stated, “residential housing almost always increases taxes, we should not be doing this if we think taxes will go down, but there are other benefits to residential housing.” The council has a much broader scope of items they can discuss, finances being one of them. You may remember that Tom Riche voted yes to the Valley amendment at the PB level, but no to it at the council level. That is because the council is able to look at a broader range of issues. Finances should definitely be discussed.
I would like to see the council bring in several experts in addition to a financial expert. Water must be discussed. I know this year is an exception with the lack of rain, but we have mandatory water restrictions every year. Can you imagine an additional few hundred apartments to supply? I can’t.
Schools must be discussed. The planning board did not have a member of the BOE at their public hearings. The council needs to ask Dr Fishbein to appear at the council hearing to answer questions.
The traffic expert, the engineer, the planner, etc should all be questioned. I do hear the planner will be there, but that’s it.
I don’t know how anyone could possible vote on something so monumental without questioning all of these experts to see what the impacts will be for Ridgewood.
I urge you to e-mail our council and ask them to have these experts at the hearing, get the facts first hand, and then vote.
These people are our elected officials, and we have a right to make sure they have done their due diligence before they vote.
Whether you are for or against the increase to 35 units per acre, I think we can all agree that each council member needs to be able to ask questions of the experts to help them in their decision making process.
Below are the e-mails of all the council members. Please send them an e-mail today and forward this to friends. Thanks
We’ll have a nonbinding, ignored referendum on the garage at Hudson and Broad…but perhaps unwittingly demonstrating just how real that building already feels to those in power, the Village Manager announced at Wednesday’s council meeting that they are soliciting suggested NAMES for it. Once you name a thing, they know, it becomes real.
SEPTEMBER 17, 2015 LAST UPDATED: THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 2015, 2:11 PM
BY MARK KRULISH
STAFF WRITER |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS
The Village Council is moving ahead with a design for a parking garage at the Hudson Street lot, selecting Desman Design Management as the firm to provide architectural renderings for the governing body and the public to review.
The council voted 3-1 on Wednesday evening to award the contract for professional architectural and engineering services for the design of a multi-level traditional self-parking structure to Desman Design Management in an amount not to exceed $295,350.
A special public meeting was held last Tuesday by the governing body for the purpose of hearing presentations from four different companies as they pitched their ideas on a downtown parking garage.
The next night, during the Village Council’s regular work session, Village Manager Roberta Sonenfeld said the steering committee decided to recommend either Desman Design Management or Timothy Haahs & Associates Inc.
During the ensuing discussion, three members of the council gave a similar opinion while two others stated a preference for Desman, with all five members eventually agreeing on Desman as the choice for the garage.
Councilman Michael Sedon noted that Desman had focused on the “bones” of the structure more than other presentations, broaching topics such as firewalls and keeping some space between the garage and surrounding businesses.
“They had one design that was interesting with ramps outside the building and a lot of their designs had space between the shops on Hudson Street in the rear of it,” said Sedon. “They would maintain that easement outside the garage, which was different than all the other presenters.”
Next CBD Forum – September 23 at 7:30PM – Village Hall
Our Central Business District Forum will resume next Wednesday, September 23, at 730 PM, in the Village Hall Courtroom. We will discuss the new garage planned for Broad and Hudson Streets. No longer just a nice idea, the garage is moving into the design phase. We have already seen some exciting design possibilities that will be offered to our residences for their consideration. The Mayor will attend the forum and he and I will bring everyone up to date as to where the process stands and where it is headed, including a look forward at the all-important referendum on November 3. Please join us and invite your friends and neighbors to attend.
Ridgewood NJ, Ridgewood Police Department patrol officers are reportedly unable to issue any summonses for unlawful parking in metered spaces because none of them have access to the ParkMobile database. Without access to the ParkMobile database, patrol officers have no way of knowing whether a vehicle is lawfully parked.
Rumor has it that only the three Ridgewood Parking Enforcement Agents are able to issue summonses in connection with metered parking offenses.
There goes a sizable revenue stream; an additional burden for taxpayers to assume in connection with the parking garage construction.
One step forward, five steps backward , well Roberta?
SEPTEMBER 11, 2015 LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2015, 9:26 AM
BY MATTHEW SCHNEIDER
STAFF WRITER |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS
The Village Council held a special meeting Tuesday to continue the discussion on a parking garage for Hudson Street.
Six firms responded to the village’s request for proposal (RFP) for the garage; that number was narrowed down to four before the meeting began.
“We went through talking about each firm’s strengths, weaknesses and fees, and we’ve come down to four firms that are most qualified to serve the village,” said Deputy Mayor Albert Pucciarelli. “They’ll be presenting their concepts, their designs, their thought processes on what this parking garage will look like.”
The governing body will now deliberate on the proposals, and should narrow its choices by the next council meeting, officials said.
Here is a look at what the council will be discussing.
The Ridgewood News editorial today highlights in the importance of the September 16 Village Council meeting for the future of our village, and asks the Mayor and Council, “What’s the Hurry?” (see link below)
The Ridgewood News approached CBR to make a statement about how the Village Council intends to rush the vote to approve ordinances that would allow high density housing, and asked our opinion on holding the public hearing on a night that conflicts with many Back-to-School nights. (see our statement to the Ridgewood News below)
We have asked the Mayor and Council to reschedule the meeting. We urge YOU to also email the Mayor and Council and ask them to either reschedule the public hearing, or to schedule additional opportunities for public comment in the future on this very important matter. The email addresses are below. Also, please continue to reach out to friends and neighbors and encourage everyone to attend this vital meeting on Wednesday, September 16.
With elegant architecture and high-end restaurants all within walking distance, Ridgewood is both urbane and sophisticated.
By Mary Ann Castronovo Fusco | September 1, 2015
Young parents pushing strollers share the broad sidewalks with friends schmoozing at an outdoor café. Teens hunt for bargains, while grandparents treat their charges to a matinee at the Bow Tie Cinemas Warner Quad or a fresh-made waffle cone at Kilwins. Nearby, Memorial Park at Van Neste Square is an oasis of calm. Welcome to downtown Ridgewood.
“I love how walkable it is, and that everything is in one small area,” says children’s book author Ann Malaspina. “I can go to the post office and mail a package, get a coffee at Ridgewood Coffee Company, meet a friend for lunch—all while having my car serviced.” And the town is “family friendly,” adds Malaspina, who raised her two sons in Ridgewood.
East Ridgewood Avenue is the main artery, ending at the sprawling California Mission Revival-style train station, which dates to 1916 and is listed on the national and state Register of Historic Places. Over the past year, elegant way-finding signs—a joint effort by the Village and the local Chamber of Commerce—have sprouted on downtown corners, pointing visitors toward the many shops and restaurants on the side streets. More will come.
“I look at downtown as a destination,” says Village Manager Roberta Sonenfeld, a 19-year resident. “We have lots of people coming from different directions. It’s a small town feel that is also urbane and sophisticated.”
SEPTEMBER 7, 2015 LAST UPDATED: MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2015, 1:20 AM
THE RECORD
Village to hear plansfor parking garage
Proposals for a potential parking garage in downtown Ridgewood will be discussed during a special council meeting that has been called for Tuesday night.
The meeting will begin at 7:30 p.m. at Village Hall, 131 N. Maple Ave.
Ridgewood officials said the meeting will include presentations from a number of the firms that responded to the village’s request for proposals.
The council will likely choose a firm to design a multilevel parking garage when it meets Wednesday night, with an official vote planned for Sept. 16.
Village residents will vote this fall on the proposed expenditure of $15 million for the garage, slated for a site within the central business district.
AUGUST 26, 2015 LAST UPDATED: WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 26, 2015, 10:10 AM
BY MARK KRULISH
STAFF WRITER |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS
The village is moving forward with a financial feasibility study for a possible parking structure to be built at the Hudson Street lot while officials wait for responses to the request for proposal (RFP) put out seeking a building design.
The study will determine the levels of expected revenue as well as the cost of a new parking garage, said Village Manager Roberta Sonenfeld at the Aug. 12 council meeting.
Included in the analysis will be proposed parking rate schedules for Hudson Street as well as the other village lots and on-street meters, projections for daily and annual income, debt service, cost and operations.
Sonenfeld said the village received proposals from three different firms. After a discussion with the steering committee, there was a recommendation to go with the proposal from New York-based Walker Parking Consultants, the same firm that performed the study to determine whether or not the garage should be automated or self-park.
A resolution to award a contract for the professional parking services was unanimously passed on Aug. 12. The amount in the contract is not to exceed $18,500 with expenses not to exceed $1,000, which will be expended from the $500,000 bond ordinance adopted in July.
