Our new dispatcher Gypsy. Lost owner located just hanging out waiting to be picked up.
July 17,2016
the staff of the Ridgewood blog
Ridgewood NJ, the Ridgewood Police remind you that Dog license renewals were due on June 30, 2016. Dog licensing is required by the State of New Jersey, Department of Health, Office of Animal Welfare. The owners of all dogs seven months of age or older are required to annually apply to the Village in order for a license to be issued. A 3 year license may also be issued. Proof that a licensed veterinarian has vaccinated the dog against rabies must be provided and that the duration of the immunity from that vaccination extends through the full licensing period. For more information, contact the Village of Ridgewood, Department of Health at 201-670-5500 x503
Ridgewood NJ, a reader said the ,Financial Advisory Committee was created by the mayor solely as a breeding ground for future council members willing to live in his shadow and image. It didn’t work. Disband it!
The new council need a clean sweep of Village Hall and the Financial Advisory Committee which has added little to no input to Village budgeting should be eliminated.
The Financial Advisory Committee was created on April 24th 2013, resolution 14-171. The leadership of Financial Advisory Committee is there just to stamp the Village Manager’s decisions. So she can say ‘an expert panel has looked at it and they agree with my approach”. She comes from the corporate world and knows how to put everything on outside ‘consultants’.
What is the purpose of the Financial Advisory Committee? They were cheerleaders for the three council members? Populated by partisan Bergen Leeds people ,they should be neutral. So, they are not a financial advisory committee, they are nothing more than a political action committee.
The Financial Advisory Committee has been populated with political hacks and friends of the former mayor and supporters of the Village manager with their own agenda’s leaving out Village tax payers .
The Financial Advisory Committee does not even have bylaws or keep meeting minutes .Lets face it , it was beyond funny that the Chairman of FAC, was a candidate for the council election, and Weitz is not even a finance guy.
The new Council needs to be prudent but decisive in their actions. Let’s not replicate the mistakes of the past
Ridgewood NJ, According to the Bergen Record the new Village Council has decided to explore repealing Ordinance 3066 and introduce a new document that will allow the village to better retain jurisdiction over the master plan.
Now a little bit of history ,ordinance 3066 is known as “Pfund’s folly” .Approved during former Mayor David Pfund’s now a local judges time on the Village Council .
Ordinance 3066, was passed purposely in July 2007 when many residents were down the shore, previously applications to amend the Master Plan would never have even been considered. Ordinance 3066 made it easy for developers to challenge the Village Master plan and force changes init to accommodate development.
“Ordinance No. 3066, which sets forth the fees and processes involved in applying for an amendment to the master plan or development regulations, was originally passed in July 2007. The ordinance has become the subject of controversy as many believe it enabled the multiple master plan amendment applications that have dominated the agenda at Planning Board meetings.”https://theridgewoodblog.net/ridgewood-making-changes-to-controversial-ordinance-no-3066-known-by-many-as-pfunds-folly/
Ordinance No. 3066 allows these incongruous projects. No other town in New Jersey has this ordinance which was initially passed to aid the Valley Hospital development.
The ordinance has played a huge role in the litigation regarding Valley Hospital’s expansion, which many feel makes it difficult for objectors to have a say in the process.
The new Village council has decided to move forward with the process to repeal the ordinance during next week’s council meeting. As of now, the new version will be officially introduced at the Aug. 10 meeting.
Ridgewood NJ, The New Players online box office will close at noon on Thursday July 14th at noon for the July 14 at 8 performance of Prelude to a Kiss and at
noon on Friday July 15 for all other performances this weekend. Tickets will be available for purchase at the box office starting 30 minutes before the start of each performance.
RHS New Players Present:
Prelude to a Kiss by Craig Lucas
July 14 at 8 and July 16 at 8
Tickets go on sale on June 30 at 7:00 p.m.
Click here for tickets: Prelude tickets
Aronsohn, Pucciarelli, and Hauck went after Tom Riche publicly and aggressively and in the most disgusting meeting I have ever seen. Matt Rogers told them to manage this in closed session but they wanted to have a public flogging so they went against the recommendations of our village attorney and they were like the bullies in Lord of the Flies that night. Riche did NOTHING underhanded. Everything he did for the Village was above board and with the full knowledge of the Village Officials. They treated Riche like a criminal and it was just a taste of the things to come from the three dirtbags. They went on to do the same to Bernadette Walsh, John Ward, Heather Mailander, and others. They should have been taken out in handcuffs the three of them. Their names and their faces should never hang in village hall. They were a plague, the three of them, and their toxic germs are still scattered around town. Never mind sweeping them out the door….we need to completely sanitize everything and everyone that ever had contact with them.
Remember, these are the same 3 dirtbags who accused former Police Chief John Ward of violating a local ordinance (the BC Prosecutor’s Office cleared the Chief of any wrong doing), allowed the Village’s former labor attorney to defile the reputation of Susan Knudsen during an open public meeting, claimed that Bernie Walsh tried to fix a parking ticket (all she did was to have a conversation with the then Chief of Police about the supervision of parking enforcement agents), and called Bernie Walsh a liar in public after Ms. Walsh stated that she’d observed Village Manager Roberta Sonenfeld and former Mayor Paul Aronsohn shouting at then Councilwoman Susan Knudsen in a hallway at Village Hall (which did happen).
As I stated previously, every single bit of trash they talked was bullshit. The biggest bunch of dirtbags ever.
BY ALEXANDRA HOEY
STAFF WRITER |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS
RIDGEWOOD – Ridgewood’s new governing body laid the groundwork for pressing issues in their first meeting on Wednesday. Parking, budget approvals and Ridgewood Water were top items.
Parking
The council openly brainstormed different ideas to fix parking in the central business district. Deputy Mayor Michael Sedon, who kicked off the conversation, said the village should explore creating more one-way streets, which will increase on-street parking spots.
Week 1. Rubrik is already on Facebook questioning the council decisions.
He obviously doesn’t realize that he looks like a really big crank. He must think that he is going to command legions of dissatisfied residents in his own revolt. Meanwhile the old council members have moved on. Even Don, Tim and Ron have seen the writing on the wall and have kept a low profile.
The Village is ready for this change and we spoke at the polls. Rubrik is going to be that guy who attends council meetings just to hear his own voice. I wish that he ran for office so that he could have come in last. Probably would not have amassed the necessary signatures to get on the ballot.
Not all of the “old Council members” have moved on – Gwenn was sitting in the audience at last night’s Council meeting taking copious notes during the discussion about parking. She left the meeting shortly after that discussion ended, and was seen pow wowing with Rurik Halaby in the hallway.
Mr. Halaby needs to lick his wounds and go home. We simply don’t want to hear from him any more (and never did). Addressing council members as if your approval mattered was embarrassing.
Last night Mr. Halaby accursed Mayor Knudsen of “pandering to her base,” but he never blinked an eye when his buddy Paul Aronsohn did anything possible to please his buddies – property owners in the CBD and real estate developers.
You’ve gotta feel a bit sorry for Halaby. Two major election defeats within 45 days of each other and now when he speaks at Village Council meetings, no one on the dais gives a rat’s ass about anything he says, and the only person in the audience listening to him is his wife.
RE: “We need smart people to solve our problrms not idiots who have no idea what they are doing.”
You don’t understand, they know EXACTLY what they are doing… this is what ideologues do.
They DO NOT care to solve the problems of their constituents nor do they strive to make the lives of their constituents better in a direct measurable way – such as making it EASIER (better, faster, cheaper, etc.) for their constituents to do that which they have already CHOSEN to do (i.e. drive their cars)
INSTEAD, ideologues strive to CHANGE the behavior of their constituents and try to MOLD them (aka force them) into doing something that meets the ideologues ideal of perfection – which usually results in a lower quality of life with less diversity and a “sameness” reduced to the LCD of minimal happiness and misery.
The ideologues thinking in implementing the bike lane is to make driving in town more miserable so that people will be forced to abandon their (evil) cars out of frustration and convert to (good) cycling. In reality, the net result is wasted resources, angry constituents, reduction in happiness and productivity and rerouting of traffic onto more residential streets causing more safety issues and more gasoline usage (aka pollution). But don’t worry, these failures will not dissuade the ideologue. they WILL NOT see the error nor folly of their ways – instead they will redouble their efforts to try to find a new way to achieve their goals – usually by inflicting more pain and suffering on their constituents (ex: tripling the gasoline tax) in an attempt to force people to do not what they themselves want to do but what the ideologues want them to do.
The irony of it all is that if the ideologues ultimate utopia is reached the resulting world will be a miserable place with little to no innovation and no ecstasy (nor misery), but instead just the flat mediocre sameness of being… might as well be a plant.
Firstly, I wanted to compliment you all on an open and thoughtful first meeting as the newly constructed Council. For the first time in years, Residents heard truly open discourse between Council Members and real discussion on the topics before the board. That was so refreshing. Thank you.
I am writing today, as one agenda item put before you is cause for great concern: the request to dissolve Ridgewood’s in-house Construction Board of Appeals so that any relevant cases in the future will be heard by the County’s board. When this request was made, many Residents in the audience thought: “Oh no, here we go again.” In light of this request it felt clear that Residents, and the Council, will have to remain very tuned-in and vigilant even with the prior Council’s voting block gone, as elements of their agenda may remain.
There is no way that Ridgewood should dissolve the Construction Board of Appeals (CBOA) at a time when so much potential construction, and construction related reviews, disputes, and potentially even litigation, may stand before the Village. I was surprised that our Village Manager did not catch this and even appeared to support the request. The CBOA representative who requested the dissolution indicated that this board hasn’t had much to do for several years and so may not be needed. One of the reasons they have not had much to do is that many of the construction projects proposed in Ridgewood are of such a controversial nature that they’ve been held up for years. However, at least four of these construction projects filed site plans last month and hope to have construction permits asap. Despite the passage of the recent high density multifamily ordinances, promoted by the prior Mayor and Deputy Mayor, these ordinances and the related applicant construction projects remain controversial, due to their size, scale and density being at odds with the majority of Residents’ desires, as well as issue with the process by which they were passed.
Given this, Ridgewood absolutely cannot turn over any governance and or construction review to outside entities or boards. Ridgewood needs to control its own destiny and we are lucky to have so many Residents with the smarts, talents and experience to do that.
As such, please, do not dissolve our Construction Board of Appeals right at the time it may be needed the most.
Ridgewood NJ, Just a quick take on last night first council meeting with the new council , if tonight is any indication of things to come, so much is going to be accomplished. Ordinance 3066 is to be repealed.There was real talk about Ridgewood Water,even addressing the law suit.
The parking issues were addressed with real common sense and many new ideas as well as recognition of the immediacy of getting things done quickly. Roberta didn’t run the meeting and actually did what she is supposed to do, inform the council!
Rurik Halaby could not help himself. He had to praise the past council and once again went on and on about how there has never been anyone like Roberta. He gave Susan a mild lecture and talked about his belief that Valley is a done deal and to fight this would be the equivalent of endangering lives( lifes?)He cautioned Susan not to base her decisions on a few disgruntled neighbors and move Ridgewood forward into the future embracing change and growth. I might have made this sound better than it actually did! But she was very polite as usual.
Hopefully we go forward with a suit against Valley. maybe it would tie things up long enough for them to start developing all the other properties they have purchased and their argument that their expansion is for the greater good will not have as much impact in a court of law as it seems to have done with the current judge.
Ground Water Under Direct Influence of Surface Water (GWUDI)
July 14,2016
the staff of the Ridgewood blog
Ridgewood NJ, The term “GWUDI” refers to a groundwater source that is located close enough to nearby surface water (e.g., a river or lake) so as to receive some amount of direct surface water recharge. If a portion of the water source is from surface water, then the groundwater source is considered to be at risk of contamination from pathogens and viruses that are not normally found in true groundwater. Ridgewood completed a screening process of all of its wells in 1994, and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) found that none of the wells were considered to be under the direct influence of surface water.
More recently, data reviewed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) suggested that five Ridgewood Water wells may be under the direct influence of surface water, and as a result, Ridgewood Water has installed advanced disinfection equipment at four of these locations, and removed the fifth well from service. Ridgewood Water will continue to study the water quality at these wells during the next year to better understand the relationship between surface water and groundwater and determine whether additional treatment steps are necessary.
In light of this information, Ridgewood Water is also performing a study of 33 additional wells in the water supply system that are located near surface water bodies to look for any evidence of surface water influence in these wells. If any evidence is found during the course of this study of such a connection, Ridgewood Water will immediately install advanced disinfection treatment at these locations. It is important to note that routine distribution system monitoring of the Ridgewood Water distribution system since 2005 has never detected any positive samples in the entire system that would indicate a surface water impact on microbiologic quality of water supplied to customers.
Ridgewood Water is beginning a year-long study of its supply well system to evaluate the vulnerability of the wells to microbiological contamination from nearby surface water bodies.
Quarterly progress updates can be found HERE.
ABOUT THE STUDY
Ridgewood will be performing the GWUDI study under a rigorous Source Water Monitoring Plan which has been approved by the EPA. The study involves the collection of water samples from up to 38 wells and three surface water locations on a weekly and biweekly basis. The samples will be analyzed in the laboratory for evidence of microbiologic activity and for other “indicator parameters” that may indicate surface water influence.
All samples will be collected and analyzed by an NJDEP-certified laboratory and will be reported on a quarterly basis to the NJDEP and EPA.
Group 1 Wells (2 locations)
For the two Group 1 wells, EPA has determined that the occasional presence of of e.coli in raw water has occurred and is requiring further assessment to determine whether there is evidence of a direct connection of these sources to surface water. Ridgewood will perform weekly raw water monitoring at the two Group 1 wells for the presence of fecal coliform, e. coli and turbidity.
Group 2 Wells– (3 locations)
For the three Group 2 wells, EPA has determined that the occasional presence of of e.coli in raw water has occurred and is requiring further assessment to determine the degree of influence of nearby surface water on each well and whether there is a need for additional treatment. Ridgewood will perform weekly raw water monitoring at the two Group 2 wells for the presence of fecal coliform, e. coli, aerobic spores, pH, temperature and turbidity. Ridgewood will also perform weekly surface water monitoring at associated surface water bodies for the same parameters. The third well has been shut down and is being reevaluated for reconstruction or permanent closure.
Group 3 Wells – (33 locations)
The 33 Group 3 wells have not exhibited any evidence of being under the influence of surface water. These wells were previously screened by NJDEP and were not found to warrant additional assessment. As such, the NJDEP issued monitoring waivers to Ridgewood for these wells. EPA has determined that a further assessment of these wells is warranted at this time. The monitoring will consist of biweekly raw water sampling and analysis for e.coli bacteria.
Ridgewood has also agreed to perform Hydrogeologic Sensitivity Assessments (HSAs) of all Group 3 wells. These are reviews of the conditions and potential sources of surface contamination at each location to assess their vulnerability to future microbiologic contamination
Ridgewood NJ, for the second year in a row residents report being harassed by the Village of Ridgewood about their sidewalks. This is less than one year the requested repairs were already made.
While some residents contend the Village is just looking for the permit fee others like Barb Ehret Crowe on the “It takes a Village of Ridgewood Facebook page ,”The thing that is crazy to me is in most cases damage is caused by trees planted and maintained by the village yet the cost for the damage they create becomes the burden of the homeowner. Makes no sense”
Amended 9-16-2015 by Ord. No. 3498
A. It shall be the duty of any owner of real property abutting any public street or sidewalk in the Village of Ridgewood, at the owner’s sole cost and expense, to install, construct, repair, alter, relay, reconstruct and maintain the sidewalks in front of or abutting such property whenever such sidewalks are required as hereinafter provided or, being already installed, shall be in such state of deterioration or disrepair as to constitute a hazard to the general public using said sidewalks unless they are repaired, altered, relaid or reconstructed. In addition to the foregoing, it shall also be the duty of the owner, at the owner’s sole cost and expense, to install, construct, repair, alter, relay, or reconstruct curbs where the deterioration or damage to the same has been caused by the actions of such owner. B. It shall be the duty of any owner of real property abutting any public street or sidewalk in the Village of Ridgewood, at the owner’s sole cost and expense, to maintain the interior of the tree wells located in/on the sidewalk in front of or abutting such property each year by weeding, removing debris and maintain the overall clean appearance of the tree wells and the interior of same.
Many residents claim to have already done the repairs .
Maggie Borkowski Neilson ,”It takes a Village of Ridgewood Facebook page,” I replaced last year were due to-their trees. Now they’re back saying they see another. No trees near it, no different than last year. Wasn’t a problem then but is now. Guess they missed it last year while marking up the rest of my sidewalks.”
She went on to say , “We are on Fairfield. Our entire street was done last year this time. I’m angry because I fixed all the ones they marked, plus an extra just to be sure, and now they’re coming back looking for more! Trying to double dip on the permit fees when they haven’t even completed the rest of the town once yet.”
Many felt a call to Village manager Roberta Sonenfeld would end up hearing 30 minutes lecture that how everything she has been doing is great with zero defect rate and ‘you’ the resident must be wrong?
Maggie Borkowski Neilson said after a visit to the engineering department claimed ,” They are blaming the fact that they used temps last year as to why they didn’t catch this one slab. Also said yes, my contractor had a blanket permit to do work but didn’t notify them that they worked at my specific address so that is why they are back at my property one year later.”
Many long time readers remember that following a citizen complaint registered with the Village, all sidewalks on South Irving Street were inspected in late 2010 or early 2011. Notices of violation were subsequently mailed to many property owners and several contractors began work on repairs in the summer of 2011.
Below are two articles, from today’s WSJ and Bergen Record, on Monday’simportant NJ Appeals Court ruling on Affordable Housing (AH) that will: (1) substantially lower the overall number of AH units required by municipalities under AH laws, and (2) may cause further delay in defining the actual obligations of municipalities under AH laws. In the Record article, even Kevin Walsh, the Fair Share Housing advocate (whose threatening of “hearsay” letter was wrongly permitted to be read into the Planning Board’s record by attorney, Gail Price – as if it represented a legal determination – scaring some Board Members and improperly influencing votes) indicated the forthcoming delays from this ruling, saying: “it requires further studies.”
In short, this ruling and these articles support what I, and other members of CBR, tried to convey to the Planning Board and Village Council during the past couple of years of overstated AH ‘threats’ proffered by Mrs. Price: that the Affordable Housing/COAH matter is, despite her puzzling advice, very unsettled and will continue to lack real clarity, potentially for years to come. It’s been that way since the 80s. No Legislature wants to fully effect the laws because they recognize their often impossible demands on NJ’s municipalities. However, conversely, no legislature, or legislator (other than Christie), has effectively sought to rework them or strike them down due to the obvious political implications.
These laws are just too flawed, resulting in the tumult and dysfunction of the past several decades. Fact is: there are no clearly defined AH numbers for Ridgewood right now. And there’s a chance there may never be. Given this, our representatives need to govern planning based on “what is right for Ridgewood now and in the future” and not “what minimizes builder’s remedy lawsuits.”
I firmly believe Mrs. Price wrongly influenced the Planning Board decision on the Multifamily Ordinances by alleging that a “Yes” vote was needed on the Master Plan changes, enabling development at the excessive levels sought by developers, to avoid potential developer lawsuits based on recent AH court rulings. As many anticipated, these rulings have now been lessened, and to some degree, called into question. Unfortunately, Mrs. Price never properly educated the Board on how dysfunctional the AH/COAH laws and politics have been (and very well will be), and that until such time as an unlikely final verdict is delivered, they should be wary reacting too quickly to threats from developers.
The implications of Monday’s ruling serves to underscore the unwise, biased and, unacceptable for Ridgewood, process undertaken by the prior Planning Board and Council. While we can and should promote fitting and proper development (and proper “development process”) in Ridgewood, which does add affordable units to our housing base, we should never have done this in the manner – fraught with bias and influence – that occurred over the past four years.
Beyond this, I believe there are certainly other ways Ridgewood can more properly and proactively plan to meet future AF/COAH requirements. These ways may be more creative and better for both Ridgewood and those truly needing AH than those put forth by the developers. I look forward to discussing my thoughts on them with you. I have been in the multifamily business for two decades, have managed many properties with affordable and moderately priced units, and am happy to share my experience.
Lastly, it is important to note that if members of the prior Planning Board and Village Council voted out of fear of lawsuits, they already got one: and sadly it’s from their own Residents, the very people they were elected or selected to properly represent. It’s a suit that alleges decisions based upon conflict of interest, outside influence, and improper representation and, most importantly, seeks to correct the serious mistakes in planning, representation and judgement made by the prior Council and Planning Board.
While the AH/COAH laws truly lack clarity, what is clear is that Ridgewood’s Residents demand proper planning and process. There is a much better route than the one taken by the prior Planning Board and Council.
Best Regards,
Dave Slomin, Resident
Follow up _________________________________________________________________
July 13,2016
Dear Mayor, Council and Village Attorney Rogers,
My July 12th email provoked feedback from a good number of fellow Residents and representatives various Ridgewood citizen groups, including responses to my letter and the linked articles with concern that pro-development attorneys may contend the appellate decision does not “change anything.” As the agenda indicates tonight’s Council meeting will address litigation in closed session, I wanted to make sure my comments were placed in the proper context, asMonday’s ruling does impact things here in Ridgewood.
My point is that the ruling exemplifies the significant dysfunction and lack of clarity that continues to exist (as it has for several decades) in the Affordable Housing definitions and determinations at the State level. This highlights the Planning Board attorney’s failure to properly advise the Board on how to address these issues. Mrs. Price, as a professional land use attorney, was well aware of this dysfunction and should never have counseled our Planning Board as she did. By proceeding as if the now reversed lower court decision was new “scripture,” and by either misunderstanding and/or misapplying other standards, the Planning Board attorney wrongly influenced the public debate and Board members’ votes. Necessarily, therefore, the Village Council proceeded under a flawed process and construct.
I do understand that whether State rulings ultimately determine that Ridgewood owes 50, or 100, or 500, or 1,000, or 100,000,000 affordable units, we are well short of that number and need to provide some additional AH units. From that singular perspective the ruling has a more limited impact. However, that is not the issue at hand. Rather, the issue is the defective and conflicted process in our municipal governance effecting the passage of recent pro-development ordinances. As such, what the appellate court’s decision signifies to me – as a multifamily real estate professional, with several decades of experience – is that the law has been and will be in a state of flux for some time to come. That no one can predict with certainty what will happen should definitely have been strongly conveyed to the Planning Board and Village Council prior to their votes. It was not. That is why the willingness of the prior majorities on the Council and Planning Board to side with those speculating with our downtown is so particularly egregious. Rather than react and surrender to an imagined obligations, or cave to the potential of developer lawsuits, Ridgewood should have performed correct and proper master planning with proper construct and counsel. There were so many things wrong and biased in their failed excuse for “planning.” You have the opportunity to begin the process of correcting this and protect Ridgewood from reckless overbuilding now and in the future.
Thus, I urge the newly constituted Council to address all pending litigation in view of the voters’ mandate. And you do have a clear cut mandate. Mayor Knudsen and Deputy Mayor Sedon both won their council seats in a landslide two years ago. And in the recent election, not only did Councilmembers Voigt, Hache and Walsh win in another landslide, but they routed the candidates heavily promoted by Aronsohn, Pucciarelli and Hauck to promote furtherance of development at the excessive scale and density recently passed. Then, subsequent to these elections, Residents next defeated the oversized garage by a vote of 2 to 1. These were not just victories. They were repudiations. They represent the voices and the clarity with which Ridgewood Residents speak and vote once we know the truth. Residents have spoken. You know very well what your constituents want. The recent votes leave no questions whatsoever. Your actions need to reflect the mandate we gave you.
Now is the perfect opportunity for the Village to move forward in acknowledgement of the serious issues raised by litigation in the housing and hospital lawsuits. With these suits, along with the garage referendum matter, you need to rectify Ridgewood’s core problems. Let’s show progress by first openly acknowledging that serious mistakes were made by the prior Council and Board Members. We all know it… our votes showed it. A perfect starting point for that is to recognize the legitimacy of the issues raised by our fellow citizens’ lawsuits, and settle those lawsuits as strong representatives of your constituents and not as officials fearful of outside interests. Then, let’s redirect the Village’s resources to focus on the developers with either settlement talks or continuing litigation, whatever is required to do what is truly right for Ridgewood. If you do what’s right, you will have our endless support. If any shortcuts are taken, Ridgewood’s divisions will sadly remain. And it’s time to end our divisions.
Lastly, please note I am including Mayor Knudsen in this email, as I entered her email incorrectly in my email of 7/12.
Ridgewood NJ, looks like Ridgewood residents who questioned the over development of the central business district proved right all along. A state appeals panel overturned a court order that could have added thousands of units to developers’ plans.
Suburban towns are not required to address the so-called “backlog” of unmet housing needs that supposedly accumulated from 1999-2015. This is a very good development for Ridgewood. The developers have much less leverage than they thought they did. Now we have to press the point that we are fully built-out, have been for decades, and should not be obliged by any court to “build up”, city-style, to accommodate large numbers of new residents.
What a shame for Saraceno, Simoncini, Pucciarelli and all the others that stood to gain big time and pushed so hard to get all that housing into the CBD. Kudos to,the citizens who delayed all the development and stood up to Aronsohn and his horrible reign of terror, and Gwenn with her sparkly eyed talk about COAH.
Warning: Undefined array key "sfsi_riaIcon_order" in /home/eagle1522/public_html/theridgewoodblog.net/wp-content/plugins/ultimate-social-media-icons/libs/controllers/sfsi_frontpopUp.php on line 165
Warning: Undefined array key "sfsi_inhaIcon_order" in /home/eagle1522/public_html/theridgewoodblog.net/wp-content/plugins/ultimate-social-media-icons/libs/controllers/sfsi_frontpopUp.php on line 166
Warning: Undefined array key "sfsi_mastodonIcon_order" in /home/eagle1522/public_html/theridgewoodblog.net/wp-content/plugins/ultimate-social-media-icons/libs/controllers/sfsi_frontpopUp.php on line 177
