THIS Wednesday, December 9th at 8:00 pm at Village Hall
PLEASE try to attend the meeting. The Mayor and Council will be discussing TWO very important issues that could change the character of our village forever: Multi-Family Housing and the Hudson Street Parking Garage. It is crucial that as many residents as possible attend the meeting to show the Mayor and Council that residents remain vigilant and demand responsible decision-making. On September 30, more than 600 residents turned out and our voices were heard when the Council voted 4-1 to perform studies to understand the effects of adding high density housing to the CBD before voting. Let’s continue to have a voice!
Agenda:
At approximately 8:30 pm, after presentations, Village Manager and Council reports, and comments from the public, a $12.3 million bond ordinance will be introduced to fund the Hudson Street Parking Deck. The parking garage discussion is relevant to the high-density housing debate. If the largest of the 3 parking garage options is approved (which is likely, as it is favored 3-2 by a majority of the Council members), the new parking garage could set a precedent for the height, size and bulk of future buildings in the CBD, and could have implications for the size of any new apartment buildings. See attached for photos of the proposed garage, particularly the view on Hudson Street.
The Public Hearing on Land Use and Development (High Density Housing) will continue, and the Mayor and Council will discuss the next steps to be taken with regard to the four independent studies approved onSeptember 30, including financial impact, comprehensive traffic, school impact, and infrastructure studies. We must demand Village Council members honor their commitment and hire an independent firm to conduct all of the promised studies, taking into consideration the effects of adding four multi-family developments, a 98-unit assisted living facility and a large parking garage all at once.
Please come to the meeting at 8:00 pm on Wednesday. Let’s show the Mayor and Council that we did not forget what they voted for on September 30th!
If you can not attend the meeting, you can watch the meeting on Fios Channel 34 or Cablevision Channel 77.
Thank you for your continued support.
Citizens for a Better Ridgewood
I found some interesting data when combing through the reports on the village website: https://www2.ridgewoodnj.net/subdept_detail.cfm?sub_dept_id=287&dept_id=55
Look at Tables 8 and 9 in the Chestnut Village Exhibit CV-2: https://mods.ridgewoodnj.net/pdf/engineering/pb/ExhibitCV_2_Burgis_Planning_Report_Two_Forty_Assoc_12_20_13.pdf
It indicates that the Chestnut Village development will generate about $200k in municipal tax revenue. General municipal services should cost about $70k for the 91 projected residents. The developers report only assumes 7 school age children at a cost of about $14k each. So the projected cost to the town is about $170k, with a surplus of $30k.
A few major issues with these assumptions though:
– Only 2 additional school age children would wipe out that “surplus”. The Chestnut Village has proposal has 52 units. 7 children per 52 units is a 0.13 ratio. This report (https://mods.ridgewoodnj.net/pdf/engineering/pb/ExhibitB_15_Planner_Proposed_LandUsePlan_Amendment.pdf) indicates that a 0.26 ratio is more typical for Ridgewood multi-family units. And some apartment buildings, like those on Oak Street, have ratios greater than 0.5. Thus, the Chestnut Village could easily have twice as many children as the developer assumes. Just two “extra” children would wipe out the $30k surplus of the project, and each 7 more beyond that would cost $100k.
– All these costs are “average”, not “marginal”. At some margins, adding a new student or a new resident would be inexpensive, like if classrooms aren’t two crowded or village services aren’t too utilized. At other margins, a unit of new demand could be very expensive, like if you needed to hire a whole new teacher or a many new municipal workers.
My conclusion: lots of uncertainty on the financial projections of these projects. No “single number” or “single study” will capture the true range of uncertainty. Be careful citing a developer report, a village report, an opponents report, or a proponents report as the “truth”.
Note: I’m still a supporter of these projects b/c I believe that on-net, in the long run, such projects will be good for both Ridgewood and for society overall.
John V… The combo of the Valley expansion, garage and high density housing is the perfect combo of issues to divide a town that has a combo of long term residents and newcomers… Welcome to Ridgewood… hey, it’s a great place but these 3 issues will continue to drive a lot of hostile opinions…
Sorry, it’s Chanukah. (Thanks, mayor.)
Paul, add in the senior assisted living facility/parking lot combo, schedler and that the HDH is actually four separate new projects. All major, historic changes to the nature of town. I just don’t understand why they all need to be so big, using the maximum square footage possible while not doing that has kept ridgewood pretty great for many many years.
Big is where the Bingo money flows to the political decidees of these oversized bloated non Conforming multifamily projects and slum making mega Garages that we dont need. Restaurants might See need for their banks to bucks restaurant plan but dont want any exposure to an expensive underutilized asset