village Council Public Meeting 20151209
A REGULAR PUBLIC MEETING OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD HELD IN THE SYDNEY V. STOLDT, JR. COURT ROOM OF THE RIDGEWOOD VILLAGE HALL, 131 NORTH MAPLE AVENUE, RIDGEWOOD, NEW JERSEY ON WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2015 AT 8:00 P.M.
1. CALL TO ORDER – OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT – ROLL CALL – FLAG SALUTE – MOMENT OF SILENCE
Mayor Aronsohn called the meeting to order at 8:03 P.M. and read the Statement of Compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act. At roll call, the following were present: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon and Mayor Aronsohn. Also present were Roberta Sonenfeld, Village Manager; Heather Mailander, Village Clerk; and Matthew Rogers, Village Attorney.
Mayor Aronsohn led those in attendance in the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag.
Mayor Aronsohn gave a brief overview of the procedure for tonight’s meeting. He referred to the multi-family or high density housing issue, and stated that the Village Council intends to go forward with several studies relative to the financial impact, impact on schools, and traffic. Mayor Aronsohn announced that the Village was able to obtain an extension on the Affordable Housing Obligation through the end of March. He would like to use March 1st as the deadline for the impact studies, which should give Mr. Rogers adequate time to make the submission to the court.
2. ACCEPTANCE OF FINANCIAL REPORTS
Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Bills, Claims, and Vouchers, and Statement of Funds on hand as of November 30, 2015, be accepted as submitted. Councilman Sedon seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Village Council minutes of July 8, July 15, and November 4, 2015 having been reviewed by the Village Council and now available in the Village Clerk’s Office be approved as submitted. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. DRIVE SOBER OR GET PULLED OVER – 2015 YEAR END HOLIDAY STATEWIDE CRACKDOWN
Councilman Pucciarelli read the following proclamation:
5. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC
Mayor Aronsohn asked if there were any comments or questions from the public this evening.
Ellie Gruber, 229 South Irving Street, said that she is a member of a large group of residents, who feel there is a lack of good planning in Ridgewood. Ms. Gruber said that there is no comprehensive planning, only reactions to applications. This group feels that the governing body needs to take a step back and do proper planning, which would involve independent and comprehensive studies of many pending projects. Ms. Gruber stated that residents overwhelmingly voted for a parking deck to ease the parking problems in the CBD; however, before any contracts or bond financing can be completed it would be prudent to wait until the completion of the four promised, independent studies that will look at the impact of hundreds of apartments in the town, and on the parking deficit. It is important to understand the consequences associated with hundreds of new residents and their cars on the streets of Ridgewood. Ms. Gruber said that the garage proposal should not be stopped, but it must be seen in the context of the multi-family housing, and other factors. The impact studies will give the taxpayers a more complete picture of their obligations. She asked if the Village Council would agree to include the proposed garage in these studies, because this could only result in a better parking structure that will benefit the entire Village.
Lorraine Reynolds, 550 Wyndemere Avenue, indicated that she was not happy about the restrictions placed on the public comment section during the first part of the Village Council meetings. She said that the agendas have always indicated that public comment would be limited to 30 minutes, but she doesn’t remember a time when comment was stopped after 30 minutes. This is because the Village Council always wanted to hear the views of the residents. Ms. Reynold stated that it is unfair to make people stay until 11:00 P.M. in order to speak.
Ms. Reynolds indicated concern with cost overruns relative to the parking garage project even though there will be a Construction Manager. She asked what will happen if the initial cost is actually higher than the cost predicted by the architect. She questioned how Village staff could calculate a bonding amount when the project has not gone out to bid. Ms. Reynolds suggested that the Village go out to bid for Option A and Option C first so they can get a better idea of the actual cost. This can be done during the time the Village Council is waiting for the results of the four comprehensive studies, and at that time they will have all the information needed to determine which garage is appropriate for that location. Ms. Reynolds concluded that it makes no sense to bond without these numbers.
Ms. Reynolds stated that she spoke with four of her friends about the parking garage. Three of the four were not very well informed about the garage, but agreed that more parking was needed in Ridgewood. Ms. Reynolds showed everyone the renderings and design of the structure, and they all agreed that Option A was much too massive for the property on Hudson Street. They commented that if they had known how large the building would be, they wouldn’t have voted in favor of it. Ms. Reynolds added that the vast majority of people voting in favor of the garage were simply voting for more parking, and were not aware of what Option A would look like. She asked the Village Council to reconsider Option C.
Meegan Shevlin, 512 Van Buren Street, hoped that the vote on the parking garage would not be the typical block Village Council vote of three to two. This Village Council is viewed as divided, and she hopes the Village Council would vote in a more unified manner this evening. Ms. Shevlin understands that the Village has the option to go to the Bergen County Improvement Authority (BCIA) to bond on their behalf if there is not a super majority vote tonight. She questioned whether going this route would involve additional costs, how much time would be added to the overall process, and if the BCIA has their own review procedure. Ms. Shevlin was curious about the impact of a possible rise in interest rates, and if at the end of the bonding process, the garage would default back to Village ownership or would the Village have to buy it back from the BCIA.
Ms. Shevlin agreed with speakers at a previous meeting who suggested that some money be spent to maximize existing parking spaces in the lower CBD. The Village needs to look into the possibility of purchasing property for parking at the rear of the movie theater, and promote the fact that parking is available there. Ms. Shevlin thought Councilman Sedon’s recommendation to make Chestnut Street, Oak Street, and Walnut Street one way in order to create diagonal parking was something to consider.
Ms. Shevlin said she does not agree with the suggestion that parking rates should be raised and enforcement hours expanded, which has been recommended, and is now supported by the President of the Chamber of Commerce. The cost burden of the parking garage should not be carried solely by those who park on the street and use the garage. The businesses benefiting from increased foot traffic should share these costs. Ms. Shevlin recommended a system whereby people would get a voucher for a dollar towards the price of parking, so they would pay one dollar instead of two dollars. The business owner would then pay the additional dollar to the parking utility.
Ms. Shevlin focused more on the height of the structure, and was shocked when she learned at the last meeting that Option A calls for a parking garage that is 270 feet long on Broad Street. She noted that there is a thriving art community in Ridgewood and she suggested that murals be painted onto the concrete in keeping with the character of the Village. She recommended that the proposals for the murals be reviewed and approved by the Historic Preservation Commission.
Matt Guetler, 375 Glenwood Road, stated that the Village is at a pivotal moment, facing profound changes and a wide array of development. Contrary to popular belief, the majority of the residents of Ridgewood are not fearful of change and are not against everything. Mr. Guetler said he supports the construction of the parking garage, but it must be done well, as must the other potential projects in the Village such as Valley Hospital, Garber Square, Schedler Park, and the multi-family housing development. These developments offer a host of benefits to Village residents, but their concurrent consideration makes for a perfect storm in planning, capable of causing fiscal strain, tax increases, and irreversible negative impacts to the quality of life, environment, and Village charm. Mr. Guetler stated that these projects inter-relate and could cause significant impact, which is the reason for impact studies. Mr. Guetler is hopeful that the Village Council and the Concerned Residents of Ridgewood can work together to do what is right for the Village. They must plan and prepare for the changes the Village is experiencing, and he pointed out that there has never been a comprehensive traffic study done of the Central Business District (CBD), or the adjacent communities, which is why Mr. Guetler supports changes that are done properly.
Rick Boesch, 64 Park Slope, asked the Village Council to consider an idea he has relative to the parking situation. He referred to Parkmobile, which retains data, and warns individuals remotely that the time is running out at their space. The Walker Study states that there are parking spaces available, but they can be difficult to find. He suggested that Parkmobile be extended so that a motorist could be advised of the nearest available parking space to their location via GPS. Mr. Boesch stated that the inefficiency of searching for a parking space is frustrating and causes traffic. Using Parkmobile would diffuse traffic away from those areas already clogged by parked cars. Optimal efficiency is now 100% occupancy, and the town could take advantage of the fact that every space would be utilized, bringing in additional revenue. No further parking studies would be needed because the statistics are available online. Mr. Boesch said that this simple idea helps to capture many economies of scale, with increased revenue and efficiency, resulting in decreased costs. A software development company could be enticed into developing this app if Ridgewood would offer to allow the company to sell this extension of the app to other towns such as Hackensack, and Hoboken. In exchange, the Village could ask for a five-year deep discount. Mr. Boesch stated that if this scenario is acceptable, in twelve months the Village would be able to get a good idea of how large the parking garage needs to be. He concluded by indicating that the parking problem is something that could be solved using new techniques.
Russell Forenza, 228 Emmett Place, read an article from “Governing Technology, Can Cars That Park Themselves Reduce Traffic” by Todd Newcomb. The article states that parking garages helps, but are very expensive at $20,000 to $30,000 per parking space, and are subsidized by people who never use them. Mr. Forenza said that the articles allude to the fact that the parking garage will ultimately be paid for by the taxpayers. Hudson Street will be decreased in size, along with the removal of parking spaces on one side, and the reduction of parking on the other side. He has lived in Ridgewood since 1951, and has never experienced any problems finding a parking space in Ridgewood. Mr. Forenza suggested that the parking lot at Graydon Pool be used for parking since it is only half full in the summer and there would be plenty of parking available during the rest of the year.
Mr. Forenza referred to the multi-family housing, and stated that until Ridgewood, Glen Rock and Wyckoff successfully tackle the insufficient water supply occurring from June through September, no construction should take place. He said that there is not enough water to supply the present population, and the Village Council, along with other groups, need to solve this problem before adding to the demand.
Evelyn Kotch, 60 North Hillside Place, said she is a sophomore at Ridgewood High School and a member of the Cross Country Team. She stated that it is unsafe to have large groups of children running through town, where there is a surplus of cars. It is also unsafe for children walking and riding their bikes in the Village. Ms. Kotch stated that the learning environment of the students presently enrolled in Ridgewood schools will be weakened by an influx of new students in the schools. She recalled learning about a law in Ridgewood prohibiting chain stores and this is what everyone loves about Ridgewood. This makes Ridgewood a community and not a commercial town. She hopes the Village Council will not jeopardize the safety of residents, or compromise the education of the students in Ridgewood. Ms. Kotch thanked the Village Council for agreeing to do the comprehensive studies, and for preserving Ridgewood as a great place to live.
6. MANAGER’S REPORT
Ms. Sonenfeld reported that she has just learned that the parking arrangement which the Village has with the Ken Smith property will be terminated next year. This is the parking lot where CBD employees have been allowed to park, and Ms. Sonenfeld noted that this is private property. The Village will work with the owners of the property to try to find a solution. She noted that the contract gave the Village direct control over the entire lot, and the termination of the control will allow for a different approach. At today’s meeting, the owners agreed to the $80 per month price for CBD employees for the next year. She expects the lot will also be used for valet and commuter parking to bring in more revenue, in preparation for whatever development will take place at this property. Ms. Sonenfeld reiterated that the parking areas available now will not be available forever, and this incident is an arbiter of the future.
Regarding Schedler Park, Ms. Sonenfeld recalled that the Village had been approved for the Open Trust Fund grant, and she confirmed the amount of $55,710. She received an email stating that workers were beginning work today at Schedler Park, and she said that this was not the case.
Ms. Sonenfeld thanked Cynthia Halaby, of the Conservancy for Public Lands, and the Wildscape Group who worked together to remove the evasive plants at Twinney Park on Sunday.
Ms. Sonenfeld invited everyone to attend “Meet the Manager” on Wednesday, December 16th, from 4:30 P.M. to 7:30 P.M. at Village Hall. She reminded residents that the Glenwood Avenue stairs leading to the Ho-Ho-Kus train station are closed for repairs
Upcoming Events – Ms. Sonenfeld reminded everyone of Breakfast with Santa on December 12th and December 19th at The Office from 8:00 A.M. until 10:00 P.M., with reservations required. Visits at Santa’s House take place from 2:00 P.M. to 4:00 P.M. at Memorial Park at Van Neste Square. Ms. Sonenfeld encouraged everyone to enjoy the CBD during the Holiday season.
Ms. Sonenfeld presented a status on the impact studies, which she referred to as “Municipal Infrastructure”, or as the consultants term it, “Community Services”. She indicated that they discussed a fiscal impact study, comprehensive traffic review, and an education study. Consultants have been told that the study is to be based on a realistic build-out analysis of the four sites under current, versus proposed, zoning. They are looking for the impact on a 35 unit per acre density, and what could also be placed in these locations such as commercial, and commercial/office for a comparison. The study could be expanded to a comparison of 24 units versus 18 units per acre density sometime in the future. Ms. Sonenfeld reported that the Village contacted eight potential providers. The Village currently has one provider, BFJ Urbanomics, who issued a preliminary proposal addressing all four areas and includes reliance on previously obtained data. Three other entities are in the process of providing proposals in different areas, such as Ross Haber for education; Hyler Brule Associates for a fiscal impact and education study; and Maser and RBA for traffic studies. Ms. Sonenfeld stated that the general consensus seems to be that this will be a two to four-month effort. She hopes that presentations to the Village Council from these firms can take place between now and January 6th or January 13th.
Regarding fiscal impact, Ms. Sonenfeld said everyone can agree that a revenue analysis has not been done, and the fiscal impact study will present various scenarios of revenues or taxes under current zoning; what could be done now; and what could happen at this site in the future versus future zoning. Education is the biggest piece of the expense side, and she stated that some in-house studies have been done on the impact of enrollment. Ross Haber was recently contracted by the Board of Education to perform a Demographic and Utilization Study to cover enrollment history and projections. The Village wants to look at how the work he did could be leveraged to get more specific ideas and conclusions relative to multi-family housing, focusing on these four developments in particular.
Ms. Sonenfeld explained that community services or municipal infrastructure includes sewer, water, police, and fire. She noted that studies have been done in these areas by staff. Consultants will be requested to review and verify these studies, and to determine if further studies are needed in those areas.
Ms. Sonenfeld stated that traffic is the most complex of the four, and the cumulative effect of all four developments being online simultaneously must be addressed. Different build-out options must be compared, such as multi-family housing versus commercial, and commercial versus office. It will be assumed that the parking deck is in place, with the implementation of proposed recommendations for improved traffic flow. There are recommendations which make the area near Hudson Street and Broad Street better than it is today. The Village Council needs to decide whether to put North Walnut Street into the mix. Ms. Sonenfeld stated that the Village Council must agree on a definition of “comprehensive”, and she added that she has been working closely on this with Robert Rooney, Village CFO.
Mayor Aronsohn thanked both Ms. Sonenfeld and Mr. Rooney for their work on formulating these studies. He stated that the deadline of March 1st has to be emphasized to these firms, and he suggested that a special meeting for January 4th or 5th, 2016, be designated for these presentations, and a selection of the firm to conduct these studies. Ms. Sonenfeld reiterated that a study projecting future enrollment in Ridgewood schools has already been done, so additional work shouldn’t take very long. The time frame for these studies should be done in a parallel, rather than sequentially, in order to save time.
Councilman Sedon thanked Ms. Sonenfeld for getting so far in such a short time. This will assist everyone in making an informed decision. Councilman Pucciarelli agreed, and stated that this is an important due diligence exercise, which deserves the time and attention necessary to do it right. He initially voted against these studies on September 30th, but feels he now has a better understanding of what the studies will accomplish.
Changing topics slightly, Mr. Rogers stated that there is a lawsuit in the Bergen County Superior Court involving the affordable housing component or housing element of the Master Plan. In March 2015, the Supreme Court of the State ruled that each municipality must present a housing element, with regard to its mandated need to provide a realistic proposal for affordable housing to be developed within its borders. The Village has gone through a number of processes and procedures, and there had been a deadline of December 7th, to present the housing element. An order to provide a Summary Plan was issued on October 22nd, which form is prepared by the Court Appointed Master, so that every town would have the same number, and the same sequence of their housing element in front of the Master. Ridgewood submitted their summary plan a day early so that the Court would understand that this issue was being approached proactively, and that the Village was acting “in good faith” regarding the mandate. Mr. Rogers explained that “good faith” is an important aspect of this case because without it, the Court would not be giving the immunity from any Builder’s Remedy Lawsuit, which the Village has at this time. The day after the Summary Plan was submitted, Mr. Rogers filed a motion for an extension, which would allow the Village more time to provide the housing element. The Village has not yet received the expert report, and after two intervenors objected to the application for an extension, the Court did grant an extension and immunity to continue through the end of March 2016. Mr. Rogers asked for the same time period to be used to submit the housing element, however, the Court would not allow the same time period. The Court did give more time than the earlier deadline of December 7th to get this done. The Village is mandated to report back to the Court in the middle of January, as well as the middle of February, with details of how it is proceeding with the development of the housing element. The housing element is part of the Master Plan, which is under the jurisdiction of the Planning Board. The Planning Board made a determination to amend the Master Plan to include the four developments in the CBD, which is being considered and carried by ordinance by this Village Council, subject to studies and further review.
Mr. Rogers said that the Court is not going to let time go by with nothing being done. The Village does have some time, but the Court will make sure that the Village acts promptly within time limits. In January, the Village will have to show the Court what has been done in order for the Village to maintain immunity, and to be given additional time to develop and adopt the housing plan. Depending on what is presented, the Court may add additional qualifiers and he stressed the importance of acting promptly. If this does not occur, the Village could suffer exposure to Builder’s Remedy Lawsuits and lose the opportunity to continue to proceed with their own decisions, at which time the Court would make decisions for the Village.
Mr. Rogers said that when the Summary Plan was submitted in late November, the Court gave interested parties until December 10th to submit their responses. The interveners have asked for an additional week to submit their responses, and the Court will decide on this by the end of the week. Mr. Rogers expects a response from the intervenors and interested parties within a short time. He reiterated the importance of a response to the Court about what the Village is actually doing, meaning some type of development, and how it is proceeding.
Mr. Rogers said that Valley Hospital filed a lawsuit against the Planning Board and the Village Council regarding the proposed expansion of the campus on North Van Dien and Linwood Avenues. In Bergen County, there is always a question of interest in mediation, and a number of months ago all parties agreed that mediation would be worthwhile. The parties agreed on a mediator who is a former New Jersey Supreme Court Justice and each party has been asked to present its position, and become involved in discussions with the other side. The Village Council has two representatives, Councilwoman Susan Knudsen and Councilwoman Gwen Hauck, involved in the mediation process. The Village Manager and Village Attorney are also involved. A mediation session took place on December 3rd, in Village Hall with the Valley Hospital representative group, the Village Council representative group, and the Planning Board representative group. The three groups were separated, and the attorneys met separately as well, with both the mediator and the groups. The session began at 9:00 A.M. and concluded at 4:00 P.M. Extensive discussions dealing mostly with size, limitations of the project, and other issues came up, none of which were resolved. Mr. Rogers said that another session is scheduled for December 16th to see if there is any potential for resolution without going to trial. The trial of the Planning Board will go first, followed by a trial of the Village Council in April or May. Mr. Rogers mentioned that everyone is hopeful of a resolution to avoid going to Court, and he will update everyone after the December 16th mediation date.
7. VILLAGE COUNCIL REPORTS
REAC – Councilman Sedon said that REAC discussed plans for Earth Day, and other upcoming programs.
The Green Team – Councilman Sedon reported that the Green Team met, and discussed the plan for next year. The Village is now certified through Sustainable Jersey. The Green Team will break into four groups, who will look at how the certification could be increased; available grants; promotion of the Green Team along with various initiatives in the Village; and someone to focus on the green business recognition program.
Shade Tree Commission – Councilman Sedon said that the Shade Tree Commission is moving forward with a five-year forestry management plan, which involves a tree inventory in the Village, including the species, and condition of trees. The plan would help to identify trees that have lived past their useful life. These trees would be removed before a storm takes them down onto a house, car, or even a person. He pointed out that there is more work to be done with the Adopt a Tree program.
Conservancy for Public Lands – Councilwoman Hauck reported that Ridgewood Wildscape partnered with the Conservancy for Public Lands on Sunday for the clean- up at Twinney Pond. She met many people from all parts of Ridgewood, who managed to transform the park within two hours.
Parks, Recreation and Conservation Board – Councilwoman Hauck said that the Parks, Recreation and Conservation Board discussed special lighting for Memorial Park at Van Neste Square, which is being sponsored by the Conservancy for Public Lands. The Board talked about the leasing terms for the Health Barn at Habernickel Park, the Schedler property development, changes to the Field Use Policy, the Twinney Park clean-up, the Daffodil Festival in April, and the need for new members on the Parks and Recreation Board. Councilwoman Hauck said that the Community Center Advisory Board is conducting a survey of residents 55 years of age and older. She urged everyone to go online and take the survey. There was also discussion of the possibility of getting Wi-Fi in Village Parks.
Chamber of Commerce – Councilman Pucciarelli thanked the Chamber of Commerce for a wonderful Christmas tree lighting.
Library – Councilman Pucciarelli said he attended a Holiday Party, where they said goodbye to John Johannsen, a Member of the Board of Trustees, who is retiring after five years. He thanked Mr. Johannsen for all he has done for the Library
Ridgewood Arts Council – Councilman Pucciarelli reminded everyone of the Ridgewood Arts Council’s gala on January 31st, where art work from participating artists will be presented to the public.
Board of Education – Councilman Pucciarelli reported that he attended a meeting of the Board of Education, which included a report on the demographics of the Ridgewood Schools. The report stated that the declining student population has made room for an all-day kindergarten. It also addressed the impact of multi-family housing. Councilman Pucciarelli said that the report is not fully completed for the purposes of consideration by the Village Council. He added that the report is available online at the Board of Education website.
Councilwoman Knudsen thanked the Ridgewood Chamber of Commerce for the spectacular Tree Lighting Ceremony.
Historic Preservation Commission – Councilwoman Knudsen stated that the Historic Preservation Commission will meet tomorrow night. Desman Associates will be reviewing the parking garage design with the Commission. The Conservancy for Public Lands will address their lighting design for Memorial Park at Van Neste Square, which is a fabulous project. Councilwoman Knudsen stated that the Commission will consider two small applications, including one for Blue Mercury for proposed sign awnings, a replacement door, and façade, as well as Tito’s Burritos.
Planning Board – Councilwoman Knudsen stated that the Planning Board will meet Tuesday, December 15th in Village Hall at 7:30 P.M. The Board continues to address the Re-examination of the Village Master Plan, and an agenda will be available on the Village website by Monday.
Financial Advisory Committee – Councilwoman Knudsen met with members of the Financial Advisory Committee to review the financial analysis for the parking garage. She thanked Charles DiMarco, Nancy Johansen, and Janice Willett for their time on Sunday afternoon.
Councilwoman Knudsen said that she had the opportunity to attend the PBA Local 20 Annual Dinner last Monday. Six retirees from the Ridgewood Police Department were honored and thanked for their years of service to the community.
Councilwoman Knudsen wished everyone Happy Hanukkah, Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.
Mayor Aronsohn referred to the parking situation at the Ken Smith property, and asked Ms. Sonenfeld to keep the Village Council up to date on the situation, which could have serious implications.
Mayor Aronsohn thanked everyone involved in the Tree Lighting for making it such a wonderful event. He thanked everyone who took part in the annual Menorah Lighting, which took place on Sunday evening. These two events demonstrate the diversity and culture within the community. He noted that Sunday night was also the Christmas service of the Friends to Friends Community Church. The congregation of this church is made up of people with developmental disabilities. The church is located on Prospect Street and there is a service every Sunday night at 7:00 P.M., where everyone is welcome.
Mayor Aronsohn noted the great turn out for the clean-up event at Twinney Pond, which was a wonderful community effort.
8. ORDINANCES
a. Introduction - #3515 – Bond Ordinance – Construction of Hudson Street Parking Deck
Mayor Aronsohn moved the first reading of Ordinance 3515. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Councilwoman Knudsen said that she was supporting the introduction of the ordinance, with the understanding that she is still in the process of getting information and public input relative to the structure itself, and exactly how the structure will be funded.
Councilman Sedon asked if there was a plan in place to pay for the bond. He questioned enforcement rates, and commuter times. Mayor Aronsohn said that this had been discussed, and the discussions will continue over the coming weeks. Ms. Sonenfeld reiterated that there are a number of options that can be utilized to pay for the garage. She addressed a comment made earlier this evening and stated that the bond will not be issued until they have received construction bid documents. The bid documents will go out on January 15th, with four weeks for a response. The construction bid should be known by mid- February, and if it comes in lower than $12,300,000 bonding will not be necessary. Ms. Sonenfeld does not expect the figure to be higher than $12,300,000, but if it is, they will bond for the costs. She added that there have been several options recommended for financing.
Councilman Sedon indicated that he would feel more comfortable if there was an actual plan in place involving numbers. Once the plan is in place including rates, and enforcement times, he suggested notifying the businesses in writing first so that the Village can be proactive rather than reactive.
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3515 by title:
A BOND ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE HUDSON STREET PARKING DECK IN AND BY THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, IN THE COUNTY OF BERGEN, NEW JERSEY, APPROPRIATING $12,300,000 THEREFOR AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $12,300,000 BONDS OR NOTES OF THE VILLAGE TO FINANCE THE COST THEREOF
Councilwoman Hauck moved that ordinance 3515 be adopted on first reading and that January 6, 2016, be fixed as the date for the hearing thereon. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
b. Introduction - #3516 – Amend Chapter 265 – Vehicles and Traffic – Establish Stop Signs – California Street/Fairmount Road and Highland Avenue/Gardner Road
Mayor Aronsohn moved the first reading of Ordinance 3516. Councilman Sedon seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3516 by title:
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 265 OF THE CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC, AT SECTION 265-59, SCHEDULE IX “STOP INTERSECTIONS”
Councilwoman Knudsen moved that Ordinance 3516 be adopted on first reading and that January 13, 2016, be fixed as the date for the hearing thereon. Councilman Sedon seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
c. Introduction - #3517 – Amend Chapter 265 – Vehicles and Traffic – Parking Restrictions – Hillcrest Road
Mayor Aronsohn moved the first reading of Ordinance 3517. Councilwoman Knudsen seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3517 by title:
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 265 OF THE CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC, AT SECTION 265-67, SCHEDULE XVII “PARKING PROHIBITED CERTAIN HOURS”
Councilwoman Hauck moved that Ordinance 3517 be adopted on first reading and that January 13, 2016, be fixed as the date for the hearing thereon. Councilwoman Knudsen seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
d. Introduction - #3518 – Water Bond Ordinance – Rehabilitation of Water Tanks ($1,132,500)
Mayor Aronsohn moved the first reading of Ordinance 3518. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3518 by title:
A BOND ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR REHABILITATION OF WATER TANKS IN AND BY THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, IN THE COUNTY OF BERGEN, NEW JERSEY, APPROPRIATING $1,312,500 THEFOR AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $1,312,500 BONDS OR NOTES OF THE VILLAGE TO FINANCE THE COST THEREOF
Councilman Sedon moved that Ordinance 3518 be adopted on first reading and that January 13, 2016, be fixed as the date for the hearing thereon. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
e. Public Hearing - #3509 – Amend Various Salary Ordinances
Mayor Aronsohn moved the Clerk read ordinance 3509 by title on second reading and the public hearing thereon be opened. Councilwoman Knudsen seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3509 by title:
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SALARY ORDINANCE 3397 FIXING THE SALARIES, WAGES AND OTHER COMPENSATION FOR WHITE COLLAR EMPLOYEES; AND TO AMEND SALARY ORDINANCE 3437 FIXING SALARIES, WAGES AND OTHER COMPENSATION OF AND FOR THE SUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES; AND TO AMEND SALARY ORDINANCE 3444, FIXING SALARIES, WAGES AND OTHER COMPENSATION AND TO ESTABLISH THE “EMPLOYEE AGREEMENT” OF CERTAIN NON-UNION EMPLOYEES OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGWOOD, COUNTY OF BERGEN AND STATE OF NEW JERSEY; AND TO AMEND SALARY ORDINANCE 3445, FIXING SALARIES, WAGES AND OTHER COMPENSATION OF NON-UNON EMPLOYEES OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, COUNTY OF BERGEN AND STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Mayor Aronsohn announced that the Public Hearing was open. There were no comments from the public, and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing on Ordinance 3509 be closed. Councilwoman Knudsen seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Councilwoman Hauck moved that ordinance 3509 be adopted on second reading and final publication as required by law. Councilwoman Knudsen seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
f. Public Hearing - #3510 – Amend Chapter 105 – Animals – Cats – Establish a 3-Year Cat License
Mayor Aronsohn moved the Clerk read ordinance 3510 by title on second reading and the public hearing thereon be opened. Councilwoman Knudsen seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The Clerk read ordinance 3510 by title:
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 105, ARTICLE VII OF THE RIDGEWOOD VILLAGE CODE, CATS, AT SECTION 105-46, LICENSE REQUIRED, TO ESTABLISH 3-YEAR CAT LICENSING
Mayor Aronsohn announced that the Public Hearing was open. There were no comments from the public, and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing on Ordinance 3510 be closed. Councilwoman Knudsen seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Councilman Pucciarelli moved that ordinance 3510 be adopted on second reading and final publication as required by law. Councilwoman Knudsen seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
g. Public Hearing - #3511 – Amend Chapter 145 – Fees – Fees for 3-Year Cat License
Mayor Aronsohn moved the Clerk read ordinance 3511 by title on second reading and that the public hearing thereon be opened. Councilwoman Knudsen seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The Clerk read ordinance 3511 by title:
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 145 OF THE RIDGEWOOD VILLAGE CODE, FEES, AT SECTION 145-6, ENUMERATION OF FEES RELATING TO CODE CHAPTERS, AT CHAPTER 105, ANIMALS, TO ESTABLISH FEES FOR A 3-YEAR CAT LICENSE
Mayor Aronsohn announced that the Public Hearing was open. There were no comments from the public, and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing on Ordinance 3511 be closed. Councilwoman Knudsen seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Councilman Pucciarelli moved that ordinance 3511 be adopted on second reading and final publication as required by law. Councilwoman Knudsen seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
h. Public Hearing - #3512 – Amend Valet Parking Ordinance
Mayor Aronsohn moved the Clerk read ordinance 3512 by title on second reading and that the public hearing thereon be opened. Councilwoman Knudsen seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The Clerk read ordinance 3512 by title:
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 263 OF THE CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, VALET PARKING SERVICES, AT SECTION 263-4, “OPERATING REQUIREMENTS” AND SECTION 263-5, “VIOLATIONS” AND SECTION 265-29 “PARKING METER ZONES DESIGNATED” AND SECTION 265-72, “LOADING ZONES”
Mayor Aronsohn announced that the Public Hearing was open.
Paul Vagianos, 280 Rivera Court, asked for an explanation of the ordinance. Ms. Sonenfeld stated that the ordinance was originally written to have valet parking from 5:00 P.M. to 3:00 A.M. The point of this ordinance is to allow for valet parking in the afternoons. The ordinance allows for stricter enforcement relative to illegal valet parking, including the fact that public parking spaces cannot be used for valet parking.
There were no further comments from the public, and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing on Ordinance 3512 be closed. Councilwoman Knudsen seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Councilman Sedon moved that ordinance 3512 be adopted on second reading and final publication as required by law. Councilwoman Knudsen seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
i. Public Hearing - #3513 – Non-Union Salary Ordinance
Mayor Aronsohn moved the Clerk read ordinance 3513 by title on second reading and that the public hearing thereon be opened. Councilwoman Knudsen seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The Clerk read ordinance 3513 by title:
AN ORDINANCE TO FIX SALARIES WAGES, AND OTHER COMPENSATION OF NON-UNION EMPLOYEES OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, COUNTY OF BERGEN AND STATE OF NEW JERSEY FOR THE YEAR 2015
Mayor Aronsohn announced that the Public Hearing was open. There were no comments from the public, and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing on Ordinance 3513 be closed. Councilwoman Knudsen seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Councilman Pucciarelli moved that ordinance 3513 be adopted on second reading and final publication as required by law. Councilwoman Knudsen seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
j. Public Hearing - #3514 – Management Salary Ordinance
Mayor Aronsohn moved the Clerk read ordinance 3514 by title on second reading and that the public hearing thereon be opened. Councilman Sedon seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The Clerk read ordinance 3514 by title:
AN ORDINANCE TO FIX SALARIES WAGES, AND OTHER COMPENSATION AND TO ESTABLISH THE “EMPLOYEE AGREEMENT” OF CERTAIN NON-UNION OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, COUNTY OF BERGEN AND STATE OF NEW JERSEY FOR THE YEAR 2015
Mayor Aronsohn announced that the Public Hearing was open. There were no comments from the public, and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing on Ordinance 3514 be closed. Councilman Sedon seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Councilwoman Hauck moved that ordinance 3514 be adopted on second reading and final publication as required by law. Councilman Sedon seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
k. Continued Public Hearing - #3489 – Amend Chapter 190 – Land Use and Development – Establish AH-2 Zone District
Mayor Aronsohn moved the fifth reading of Ordinance 3489 by title and that the public hearing be opened. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3489 by title:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD AMENDING THE ZONE CLASSIFICATION AND REGULATIONS FOR CERTAIN PROPERTIES FROM THE B-2 ZONE DISTRICT INTO A NEW AH-2 ZONE DISTRICT
Mayor Aronsohn announced that the Public Hearing was open.
Jeff Goldberg, 292 Mastin Place, questioned the relationship between affordable housing and these developments. As he understands it, Ridgewood doesn’t know their affordable housing obligation at this time, and all four of these developments might only fulfill 20% of that obligation. If this is the case, he asked why the Village is using the affordable housing deadline to fast track the deliberation of these developments.
Mr. Rogers noted that Mr. Goldberg is correct in that the Village doesn’t know the number of affordable housing units needed to fulfill the its obligation. The Village did not meet its full obligation in the second round because of the way the housing element had been prepared. There will be a new number that takes the gap period from 2008 until today. This increased number will become even more problematic because the Village couldn’t meet the earlier obligation. The Fair Share Housing Center had prepared their report stating that the Village had to provide over 1,100 additional units, which seems outlandish, but Mr. Rogers expects the number to be between 50 and 100. The Planning Board has full authority over the Master Plan, and considered these four developments relative to meeting the unknown mandated need. Additional properties will have to be developed to meet the affordable housing need, and the Planning Board decided to include these properties in the housing aspect.
Mr. Rogers explained that the Village Council has to decide whether or not to adopt ordinances that are consistent with the amendment to the Master Plan. The Village must find reasons based on sound zoning and planning if it decides not to comply with the affordable housing mandate. Mr. Rogers recalled that in 2009, the Village Council took a position against the amendment to the Master Plan, recommended by the Planning Board, regarding Valley Hospital. In this instance, the Village Council had to find the necessary reasons not to introduce any ordinances; however, in this case the Village is aware that there will be a need that will exceed what can be provided. The Village’s Master Plan will be reviewed by the Court in the COAH lawsuit, and there are developers who have invested a considerable amount of time in an attempt to develop these properties. Some of these developers have intervened in, and decided to become part of, the lawsuit. This is because there was an amendment to the Master Plan which included Mt. Laurel housing, which was submitted to the Court.
Mr. Goldberg was concerned because the affordable housing obligation will not be fulfilled using these four developments. He said that other areas will have to be developed, and before long, the Village will look like Hackensack. He recommended that the Village develop areas that would really attack the affordable housing obligation with more force than these developments. Mr. Rogers explained that the Village Council doesn’t have the authority under the Municipal Land Use Law (MLUL) to decide what happens to properties. This decision rests with the Planning Board, who must determine the best use for properties within the Village to meet that need.
Mayor Aronsohn said that in 2008, when the Village last submitted a COAH plan, the locations were very limited. The Brogan Cadillac property was listed because there was a willing property owner who wanted to develop apartments there. There are now owners of four properties, who would like to see development, which means that these four sites are available for affordable housing. Mr. Rogers explained that the Planning Board is the body authorized by the Municipal Land Use Law to determine how various properties will be included in the Village’s plan. After the housing plan has been submitted and adopted by the Planning Board, it goes to the Village Council for a review and the adoption of consistent ordinances.
Mayor Aronsohn stated that the affordable housing issue shouldn’t drive the decision of the Village Council with respect to multi-family housing, but it must be taken into consideration because there are property owners who want to build apartments. The Court will look at this as an opportunity. Mr. Goldberg stated that developers want to build apartments not considered to be affordable housing, which is the problem. Councilman Pucciarelli said that this issue arises from high property taxes, high land values, and high construction costs in New Jersey. If the property was deemed to be 100% affordable he doubted that anyone would go to the trouble of developing it, and at that point the municipality would have to take over the construction of municipal housing. In the New Jersey scenario, builders are given an incentive to build a small number of affordable units on very expensive property.
Mr. Rogers explained that the calculation for the number of affordable units is not only based on the amount of available land. There are a whole host of other issues. The Court decides on the regional need, and looks at what each town can put together to meet the regional need, which is a complicated and involved process. Councilman Pucciarelli pointed out that the percentages used by the Planning Board were numbers the Planner thought would be acceptable, and numbers that other area towns would use. He hoped that the Courts would see that as an acceptable way to begin the process and address the need for affordable housing. Councilman Pucciarelli suggested that this burden be the responsibility of the private developers whenever possible.
Councilwoman Hauck said she appreciates that these types of questions are being asked because it is not incumbent upon the Village Council to make a decision, based on the affordable housing quotient, but it is a factor. Many questions are raised when the Village Council considers the costs and benefits of every scenario. She noted that this is a very complicated issue, and the Village Council has spent a considerable amount to time trying to do what is best for the Village.
Linda Kotch, 60 North Hillside Place, questioned the possibility of requiring a developer to build a certain number of affordable housing units in exchange for, or as part of, the approval process. Councilman Pucciarelli said that this is really a matter for consideration by the Planning Board; however, from a planning perspective he questioned whether the Village wants to concentrate all of its affordable housing on one site. He doubted that people living in those units would want that. Ms. Kotch said that if this question is considered more creatively, the Master Plan might not have to be amended to accommodate the new housing.
Ms. Kotch asked various questions about affordable housing, and Mr. Rogers explained that the Village Council look at development from the standpoint of whether it is right. The process requires the Planning Board to do the planning, and to decide whether there should be an amendment to the Master Plan to determine whether development should be allowed. In this case, the Planning Board decided that an amendment to the Master Plan was necessary to allow for 30 units per acre of affordable housing.
Councilwoman Knudsen said that all of the information about multi-family housing is posted on the Village website. She explained that the number of units per acre is determined on whether the units are for sale, or are rental units. The Planning Board adopted the Master Plan amendment on June 2nd, and it then goes to the Village Council for the creation of zoning ordinances. The Village Council would adopt these ordinances to be consistent with the Master Plan. Councilwoman Knudsen explained that the absence of these ordinances creates an inconsistency in the Master Plan.
Councilman Pucciarelli commented that after reviewing the information online, it becomes apparent that not every development can hit the maximum, particularly for apartments that are desirable, in this part of the country. There is on-site parking, amenity space, and retail on the ground floor in two of the zones.
Councilwoman Knudsen said that the calculations can be done based on the floor area ratio along with the amenity and open space requirements, followed by a calculation of the area, resulting in the potential number of units per acre. She suggested they work with the zoning officer to determine a number.
Martin Walker, 114 Cottage Place, said that his comments pertain to all of the ordinance amendments. He asked that the Village Council vote no on all of the ordinances because there is a fundamental issue going on in the Village that is not being addressed. He admires the visionary leadership by the Village Council relative to the parking initiative including focus groups, and the referendum. There are many small interest groups in the Village competing for resources, and he recommended a holistic approach, which compares the Village to surrounding municipalities in North Jersey, and the United States as a whole. Mr. Walker noted that the Ridgewood school system is the largest in the county, and Ridgewood is possibly the wealthiest community in New Jersey, with the highest individual tax burden. Ridgewood is known throughout the world as a school magnet town. The Village has no public policies designed to retain empty nesters, with virtually no availability of over 55 housing, and zero assisted living facilities in the CBD.
Mr. Walker stated that the Village is attracting large numbers of middle class families coming from world cultures, where multi-generational families are the norm. There is no planning in the town that takes this into account, and there is no one who believes that the State is going to take care of the elderly. The holistic approach directs the Council to carry out any and all activities that will reduce taxes for all residents in Ridgewood. There has to be affordable housing for those over age 55, which will benefit the majority of Ridgewood families.
Councilwoman Knudsen stated that one of the applicants approved for a Master Plan amendment was previously before the Zoning Board of Adjustment. While on the Zoning Board of Adjustment, Councilwoman Knudsen explored the option of making this age 55 and over development, which was rejected by the developer.
Mr. Walker stated that the fiscal impact of these developments have to be taken into consideration because many communities have discovered that by investing in planning that drives over age 55 housing, it reduces the overall cost of school development to the town. This is why Ridgewood would be such a good candidate for this type of housing because it has the largest school district in Bergen County. Mr. Walker concluded by stating that there will never be an aging in place community in Ridgewood unless there is a change in direction.
Councilwoman Hauck indicated that she would be willing to work with a group to see what could be done in the area of share house facilities for those over age 55. She added that developers cannot be forced to build housing geared to a specific group or age range, but she does agree that this is an issue that must be addressed. Mr. Walker responded that this involves long range fiscal planning.
Mahmud Bangash, 208 Crest Road, said that a number of residents at previous meetings had referenced an article that appeared in the Bergen Record in October, which insinuated allegations of a conflict of interest concerning certain Village employees relative to the multi-family dwelling applications. Mr. Bangash indicated that the most serious allegation was directed at Gail Price, the Planning Board attorney. He asked if there had been any investigation into these accusations to confirm the legitimacy of the Planning Board, or whether their output doesn’t have any value.
Mr. Rogers said he doesn’t recall this article, and is not aware of any conflict. He was sure that Ms. Price would have indicated if there was a conflict, and he added that the Village Council has no oversite of the Planning Board.
Mr. Bangash was concerned about the appearance of bias, and said that the Village Council could dispose of this now or act on it. Mayor Aronsohn said that Ms. Price would have been up front about any conflict and he asked Mr. Bangash to take this matter up with the Planning Board. He added that he isn’t familiar with the reference in the article.
Councilwoman Knudsen explained that the Planning Board retains its own professionals. She recalled that there had been mention of the fact that Ms. Price represents developers in some instances, and the Planning Board in other instances, which creates a conflict. She said it doesn’t create a conflict and explained that on occasions attorneys will represent developers in one town; and the town itself in other instances. Councilwoman Knudsen believed that Ms. Price would have indicated any type of conflict of interest up front and would have removed herself.
Dave Slomin, 36 Heights Road, said he is enjoying the give and take at this meeting. Mr. Slomin said he represents Citizens for a Better Ridgewood (CBR), who have advocated for full and comprehensive master planning for the past three years. These four impact studies are a great opportunity to fill in the blanks on issues that are missing, relative to planning in Ridgewood. He hopes these studies can be done fully, and independently, without using pre-existing data as the basis. He recommended incorporating these studies into a Master Plan since it doesn’t appear that the existing Master Plan is a viable document, because there are so many challenges to it. The strong Master Plan in Upper Saddle River has been used as a basis to protect the interests of the residents. The CBR are pro-development, especially smart development, which fits into the character of Ridgewood. Most of the people agree with raising density, which would allow for the development of multi-family housing, which would promote affordable housing and housing for seniors; however, in this case the size, scope, scale, and floor area ratio are massive.
Mr. Slomin said the Village Master Plan should look for areas in the Village that would best accommodate 55 and over housing. This could be attractive for developers who specialize in these types of developments. He asked whether it is possible to look at something between 18 and 24 units per acre, which would be a compromise. He requested that the Walnut Street Redevelopment Zone, as well as the potential assisted living and garage be incorporated into these studies.
Councilwoman Knudsen said that when Councilman Sedon made the motion relative to the four impact studies on multi-family housing, she requested that the assisted living facility and the garage be included. Councilwoman Knudsen indicated that she approached Ms. Sonenfeld about funding for a new Master Plan several months ago. Ms. Sonenfeld said that this will be brought up during budget discussions for 2016. Councilwoman Knudsen noted that every Master Plan that has been completed begins with a survey of the residents regarding what is important to them, and what characteristics they want retained. This feedback from the 1930s on has indicated that residents want to retain the charm, character, and small town feel of the Village.
Ms. Sonenfeld said that there are issues surrounding the number of 18 or 24 units per acre. Because the Walnut Street Redevelopment zone has been on hold for some time, and they still have no idea what will be developed in that area, it will be excluded from any studies. Ms. Sonenfeld explained that there is so much going on at the moment that it is impossible for the Village to address Walnut Street.
Councilman Pucciarelli commented that he hopes the Master Plan will look at the lot on Chestnut Street, where the Village’s Fleet Services garage is located because this is an opportunity to transform a derelict use, which will have a halo effect around the entire area. This Village facility causes an area of blight so close to the CBD.
Councilman Pucciarelli pointed out that the difference in Plan C and Plan A for the garage is approximately 11 feet, 6 inches. He doesn’t think this difference puts the character of Ridgewood in the balance, and it will yield 100 additional parking spaces at under $20,000 per space.
Carrie Giordano, 57 North Hillside Place, said she agrees with the need for comprehensive and independent studies. She asked if the garage was going to be a part of the study. Ms. Sonenfeld explained that a traffic study for the garage only, has already been done. As a result of that study, street directions in the area have been changed, and Maser Associates has indicated that traffic flow will be improved. These new studies, discussed at the beginning of the meeting, will be conducted with the assumption that the garage exists, and they will be combined with the garage study to gauge the impact on CBD traffic. Ms. Giordano asked if the new traffic patterns will be tested. She added that the new bike lane has caused continual back-ups as far away as Heights Road, and the consequences of this bike lane should also be included in the study.
Ms. Giordano spoke about the impact on the schools, and said she was happy to hear that there is space to accommodate all day kindergarten. She noted that the teachers are currently working without a contract, and there is a 2% cap, which demonstrates to her that the schools remain an issue. She noted that the Walker Study did not indicate a parking deficit of 400 spaces, and she doesn’t understand the reason for the spaces if they are not needed.
Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that the Walker Study was not intended to determine usage. Other earlier studies had indicated a parking deficit of up to 1,000. Ms. Giordano does not dispute the fact that parking is needed, but she would recommend the smaller of the two options.
Ms. Sonenfeld said that there had been a video camera at Garber Square for months, and based on what Village staff could see, they concluded that there is no serious traffic condition there. This project won a State-wide engineering award for its design, and the resulting pedestrian and bicycle safety. The point being made was that traffic has to be slowed down. Drivers are going through Garber Square onto Franklin Avenue at high rates of speed. Traffic was channelized meaning that there are still dedicated right turn lanes on both sides of the road, which is very important from a pedestrian safety standpoint.
Ms. Sonenfeld commented that the bike lanes can be characterized as going nowhere, or they can be viewed as the beginning of going somewhere. She thinks the improvements to Garber Square have enhanced safety, and the center divider and the new lights look wonderful.
Councilman Pucciarelli commented that the school data is constructive because it demonstrates that a decrease in enrollment is expected in the population of Ridgewood’s schools.
Councilwoman Hauck recalled that Christopher Rutishauser, the Village Engineer, said that one of the problems with Godwin Avenue turning onto Franklin Avenue is the external through traffic such as commercial vehicles. She noted that all of the studies are great, but you have to remember that the County and the State don’t do studies on regional traffic flows, and there is a lot of traffic from other towns which channels through Ridgewood. She pointed out that many drivers, who are not Ridgewood residents, take short cuts through the Village, which isn’t factored into these studies.
Saurabh Dani, 390 Bedford Road, said that his comments relate to all of the ordinances on multi-family housing. Mr. Dani was confused about what decisions the Village Council could make, and he asked for an explanation. Mr. Rogers explained that under the MLUL the Village Council adopts ordinances that are consistent with amendments to the Master Plan made by the Planning Board. Because the Planning Board has the authority to amend the Master Plan, and make decisions about the policy of development within the municipality, the Village Council normally adopts ordinances. The Village Council could decide not to adopt ordinances as long as they provide reasons, based on sound planning and zoning, that these recommended ordinances are inconsistent. In other words, the Village Council has to decide whether or not to adopt ordinances that are consistent with the Master Plan amendments voted on by the Planning Board.
Mr. Dani asked what would happen if the studies find that there is a negative impact to the Village. Mr. Rogers stated that some of the studies have zoning and planning components. If there is information contained in the studies that the Village Council considers to be important, they could send it back to the Planning Board for consideration.
Mr. Dani said he lived in Secaucus before moving to Ridgewood, and he heard of developers involved in multi-family housing paying an “impact fee”, to the schools, and the police department. He asked if an impact fee would be required in Ridgewood. Mr. Rogers said that this would be determined by the Planning Board. He added that there is a possibility of fees for “offsite improvements” which would include things such as traffic lights and road improvements.
Melanie McWilliams, 431 Bogert Avenue, asked if bids would be received for the impact studies. Ms. Sonenfeld explained that she would be soliciting proposals from several firms she has in mind, and timing, rather than pricing, will be the driving force in this case. Mr. Rogers explained that the Courts have frowned on using impact studies relative to schools as a zoning and planning component, but they do look at some infrastructure issues.
Ms. McWilliams asked if the high density housing could be put to a referendum after the studies are complete. Mr. Rogers said that zoning cannot be done by referendum, and can only be done through the MLUL by the Planning Board and the policies set forth in the Master Plan. The Village Council could look at a non-binding referendum in the future, but in all probability the Court will not give the Village sufficient time to do this.
Ms. McWilliams said that the Ridgewood School District is the largest in Bergan County, and no one could guess how many students the high density housing will bring into the schools. Mayor Aronsohn stated that the school impact study will address the increase in the number of students. Mr. Rogers said that this is not an exact science, and until the housing is built, no one can make an accurate prediction relative to the number of students.
Ms. McWilliams stated that she recognizes that the Village needs to build affordable housing, but that should not be confused with what the Village wants to do. Councilwoman Hauck explained that these are private properties, and if the property owners are not allowed to build something that is suitable for them, they could decide to go to a commercial use resulting in higher trip generation, or they could sue the Village. The Village Council has to decide what is most beneficial for the Village. Ms. McWilliams stated that she disagreed with a change to the Master Plan to accommodate someone’s “wants”. Mayor Aronsohn agreed, and added that everyone needs to be cognizant of what a property owner could do, but ultimately the Village Council must decide on what is best for Ridgewood.
Bill McCandless, 71 Ridge Road, is disappointed to use trip generation as a reason for changes. He suggested that Garber Square be included as part of these studies because it is, and continues to be, a mess in terms of traffic. Councilwoman Knudsen recalled that when she made the motion relative to the studies several weeks ago she included the CBD, and the arteries in and out, which would include Garber Square. Ms. Sonenfeld said that Garber Square and Wilsey Square will be included because of their proximity to the CBD.
Bill McCabe, 96 Avondale Road, asked if the studies will include the construction period, or if they are studies post-build only. Ms. Sonenfeld said that the studies are structured to be post-development. Mr. McCabe questioned the ramifications of these developments on the police and other Village services. He suggested that traffic and road closures resulting from construction be included in these studies. They should also include the impact on downtown merchants. Ms. Sonenfeld stated that the Village is discussing how to handle the disruption of the CBD during the construction of the parking deck. She added that after several months, the construction will take place inside the facility, resulting in less of an impact to surrounding areas. When the developers present their site plans to the Planning Board, they will have to discuss how they plan to handle construction.
Councilman Pucciarelli explained that the developers of the high density housing will have to present individual site plans to the Planning Board, where they will undergo a rigorous review and approval process. As a former Planning Board member, Councilman Pucciarelli said it is rare to schedule four applications for major site plan approval in one night. Every project will not begin on the same date, and all of the issues for consideration will result in a staggering of the final approval of the four projects. Councilwoman Knudsen agreed that this is a very lengthy process. She said that the impact studies look at a full build out, and do not include the construction phase.
Ms. Sonenfeld commented that it is likely that the parking deck will be completed before any housing construction begins. Councilman Pucciarelli said it is his understanding that there are no renderings for the Ken Smith site at this time.
Mr. McCabe questioned whether the studies would contemplate future development since these developments will not meet the entire need for affordable housing. Ms. Sonenfeld said that the various consultants are being asked to describe what could be built, based on the new zoning recommendations. Councilwoman Knudsen explained that in the case of impact to the schools, a study is done using what exists presently, and what would exist if the Village were fully built out using overlay.
Melinda Carley, 139 Richards Road, referred to earlier comments relative to leveraging previous studies. She asked if that meant the Village Council would reference previous studies, including those financed by the developers. Ms. Sonenfeld said that the major study is the one done on education by the Board of Education and it was not financed by the developers. The other study they will consider leveraging is a study done by Village staff relative to water, sewer, police, and fire. The firm doing the financial impact and infrastructure studies has been told by the Village that previous studies should be reviewed and audited. They should look at data provided by the developers regarding traffic done by Mazer Associates, which was funded from the escrow accounts. Maser Associates had audited information that had been gathered previously. Ms. Sonenfeld explained that this will be a “range number” at this point because no one knows what will be built, and there could be some wide ranges and variables.
Ms. Carley said she would welcome a discussion of why commercial development on these sites would not be preferable. Councilwoman Hauck said that this is a somewhat subjective opinion, and the consultants will be able to address how the various uses affect traffic, using standard charts. The other question to consider is whether more commercial businesses could compete in this area of the Village.
Councilman Pucciarelli said that the zoning in the CBD does not require on-site parking, which means that stores could be built on these properties, with no additional parking permitted. Alternatively, a new zone could be created requiring on-site parking, and it is generally accepted by planners that residential use creates much less traffic than commercial use. Ms. Carley agreed, but pointed out that commercial use wouldn’t affect school enrollment or wouldn’t result in a building so high that it would affect the look of the Village.
Chris Kaufman, 642 Midwood Road, said that his daughter is in second grade, with 24 other children in the class. He asked if the school impact study includes children from all the schools being funneled into the High School. Ms. Sonenfeld said that the study referred to earlier covers all of the elementary schools. Mr. Kaufman wondered if the impact studies come back with negative information, if the high density housing would not happen. Mr. Rogers said that each study will have to be considered individually by the Village Council, and there may be legal issues to discuss, depending on the negative impacts. The Village Council may identify a list of significant factors brought to light by the impact studies, and forward that information back to the Planning Board.
Mr. Kaufman asked for clarification as to “high density housing” and “affordable housing”. Mr. Rogers said that these four developments are examples of “high density” housing. Each of these zones includes a component for the development of the housing element to include “affordable housing”. He explained that the developers have not offered the Village anything at the present time, and once the immunity is gone the developers may decide to sue the Village, so that the properties can be developed in a way that would provide more affordable housing. At the moment, the Village Council must decide on an amendment to the Master Plan recommended by the Planning Board. Mayor Aronsohn explained that the Village has a prior affordable housing obligation, and it will soon have a newly identified affordable housing obligation that must be met. At this time, there are builders willing to develop four areas of apartments, with an affordable housing component. Mr. Rogers reiterated that the Court has not decided on the number of affordable units that must be provided, and the Village may fall short of meeting that number. He asked everyone to remember that, in the majority of the cases, he has seen affordable housing trump local zoning.
Ms. Sonenfeld referred to the study regarding impact on the schools, and stated that the study includes the elementary schools, grades six to eight, and grades nine to twelve. The study goes back to 2010, and forward to 2021, and provides a lot of detail because of the kindergarten question.
Anne Loving, 342 South Irving Street, asked if the garage on Hudson Street would be included in the traffic study. Ms. Sonenfeld said the traffic study assumes the garage exists. Ms. Loving agreed with an earlier suggestion that the high density housing question be put to a referendum. She explained that she can afford her home even though she is over 60 because she has always been cautious relative to home improvement projects. She referred to the parking deck and commented that the Village doesn’t have to do the biggest project just because it can.
Ellen McNamara, 120 West Ridgewood Avenue, said that they need to think about aesthetics and the appearance of the Village. She spends a lot of time in Montclair where she parks in a parking garage that is unappealing, surrounded by high buildings. She chose to live in Ridgewood, which is smaller and has a lovely downtown. During the last few months, citizens have indicated that they don’t want these four apartment buildings, and she can’t understand why this process continues.
Lynn Dewhurst McBurney, 176 West Glen Avenue, asked if the Village is locked into to 35 units per acre for future development. Mr. Rogers explained in land use and development that there is a general rule that decisions are made individually on each parcel. Ms. McBurney asked whether the 35 units per acre was an arbitrary number. She added that no one seems to be certain as to where that number came from. Mayor Aronsohn explained that Blais Brancheau, the Village Planner, determined that number and he would be the individual who will have to present an explanation of this number at a later date.
Lorraine Reynolds, 550 Wyndemere Avenue, asked Mr. Rogers to review the timeline relative to affordable housing. Mr. Rogers repeated that he made an application for a time extension relative to the immunity granted by the Court which would have expired on December 7th. The Judge granted the immunity through the end of March, for the purposes of the adoption of the housing plan. The Judge requires that Mr. Rogers report in both January and February relative to the status of the housing element by both the Village Council and the Planning Board. Ms. Sonenfeld confirmed that the companies interested in performing the impact studies for the Village will make a report to the Village Council on January 5th or 6th, 2016. Ms. Reynolds asked if the audience would be able to interact with the people making the presentations. Ms. Sonenfeld said they can’t answer that question yet because they haven’t seen any proposals by these companies. Mayor Aronsohn indicated that as always, there would be time for comment during the Public Comment section of the meeting. Ms. Reynolds questioned what would happen at the public hearing of these land use ordinances on February 10, 2016. Mr. Rogers expects the public hearing would be carried again on these ordinances.
Dana Glazer, 61 Clinton Avenue, quoted comments from Councilwoman Knudsen from the September 30, 2015 meeting indicating the need for further traffic studies due to all of the proposed developments in Ridgewood, including the parking garage. Mr. Glazer asked Councilwoman Knudsen to clarify whether she wanted the traffic study to exclude or include the parking garage. Councilwoman Knudsen said that her intention was that the study would not include the parking garage. Ms. Sonenfeld said that all four intersections were to be included, plus the parking garage, and the traffic it will produce. Traffic experts have indicated that there are two ways to look at this, which include first studying the trip generation, followed by a study of traffic distribution. In January when presentations are made, the Village Council will decide if that is good enough. The study will be done based on the fact that the garage now exists and garage volumes will be included.
Mr. Glazer said that this was not the intent of Councilwoman Knudsen at the September 30th meeting, and the Village Council voted on the study, which did not include the parking garage. Mr. Glazer said that the study needs to include the parking garage before it is built. Councilwoman Knudsen explained that the garage will not physically exist, and there seems to be some miscommunication, but she will work out the details.
John Saraceno, 17 Coventry Court, referred to the comment made earlier that the traffic study done was not independent, and that information used was provided by developers. Mr. Saraceno said that this is completely false, and he asked that John Jahr and Maser Associates attend a meeting. Mr. Jahr did his own study, which was not connected to the developers. He suggested that the area should first be rezoned for multi-family, which would be the first great step towards controlling traffic in the CBD, and in the Village. Mr. Saraceno said that John Jahr found that any one of these properties as currently zoned will generate more traffic. He added that the traffic study will have nothing to do with any amendment to the Master Plan. This rezoning would produce the lowest impact use, and would reduce traffic in the CBD. He added that if a rezoned area is presented to a developer, the Village would have the right to demand an offsite development.
Regarding the 35 units per acre, Mr. Saraceno said that Mr. Brancheau did not increase the size of the building. These buildings, as currently zoned, are exactly what are allowed today and this was not amended in the Master Plan amendment. In other words, these proposed buildings can be constructed today. Mr. Saraceno indicated that he is not in favor of buildings more than 50 feet high and this restriction will control the building density. It will be difficult to build 35 units per acre under current zoning, and Mr. Saraceno anticipates building 32 to 33 units per acre. The Master Plan amendment makes it difficult to build 35 units per acre because of the other restrictions that were added. He encouraged people to study the facts first, and to review the information provided during presentations made to the Planning Board by professionals hired by the Village, as well as Village staff. Mr. Saraceno pointed out that control of the conversation has been lost, and the only issue for consideration is the appropriate density. This is a waste of the taxpayer’s money because this development will inevitably be built.
Ms. Sonenfeld recalled that at an earlier meeting, Maser Associates said they relied on the data provided by the developers. Ms. Sonenfeld didn’t think that this was the case until today when she reviewed the material, and found that the raw data that they used for intersections was data provided to them by the developers. Mr. Saraceno stated that this information is independent and has been audited.
Councilman Pucciarelli pointed out that 35 apartments built with one bedroom could result in less school age population than 25 apartments with two bedrooms. They must be open to the fact that density does not correlate directly with anything, and decreasing the density does not always lessen the impact.
Councilwoman Hauck said that although she voted in favor of the impact studies, the Village Council must be very careful about wasting taxpayer’s money. It would be beneficial if the new studies are important to inform the Master Plan Re-Examination.
There were no further comments from the public, and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing on Ordinance 3489 be continued to February 10, 2016. Councilman Sedon seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
l. Public Hearing - #3490 – Amend Chapter 190 – Land Use and Development – Establish B-3-R Zone District
Mayor Aronsohn moved the fifth reading of Ordinance 3490 and that the Public Hearing be opened. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3490 by title:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD CHANGING THE ZONE CLASSIFICATION FOR CERTAIN PROPERTY FROM THE B-1, B-2 AND C ZONE DISTRICTS TO A NEW B-3-R ZONE DISTRICT AND ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR THE NEW B-3-R ZONE DISTRICT
Mayor Aronsohn announced that the Public Hearing was open.
Amy Bourque, 133 Sheridan Terrace, asked if the owner of another property would be able to take advantage of high density zoning benefits. Mr. Rogers stated that if the ordinance is in place, meets certain criteria, and covers a particular zone, the owner in that zone could be consistent with the ordinance criteria. Ms. Bourque asked if the study could include research into how many properties could meet the same criteria going forward, if they were to turn over or become available. Mr. Rogers stated that the Planning Board already addressed this when it considered which properties to include in rezoned areas. This is the function of the Planning Board.
There were no further comments from the public, and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing on Ordinance 3490 be continued to February 10, 2016. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
m. Public Hearing - #3491 – Amend Chapter 190 – Land Use and Development – Establish C-R Zone
Mayor Aronsohn moved the fifth reading of Ordinance 3491 and that the Public Hearing be opened. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3491 by title:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD CHANGING THE ZONE CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES FROM THE C ZONE DISTRICT TO A NEW C-R ZONE DISTRICT AND ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR THE NEW C-R ZONE DISTRICT
Mayor Aronsohn announced that the Public Hearing was open. There were no comments from the public, and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing on Ordinance 3491 be continued to February 10, 2016. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
n. Public Hearing - #3492 – Amend Chapter 190 – Land Use and Development – Establish C- Zone District
Mayor Aronsohn moved the fifth reading of Ordinance 3492. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3492 by title:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD AMENDING THE ZONE REGULATIONS FOR THE C ZONE DISTRICT
Mayor Aronsohn announced that the Public Hearing was open. No one came forward to comment and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing on Ordinance 3492 be continued to February 10, 2016. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
o. Public Hearing - #3493 – Amend Chapter 190 – Land use and Development – Amend Various Sections – Multiple Zone Districts and General Affordable Housing Regulations
Mayor Aronsohn moved the fifth reading of Ordinance 3493. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3493 by title:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD AMENDING VARIOUS DEFINITIONS AND REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO INCLUSIONARY DEVELOPMENT, RESIDENTIAL AND NONRESIDENTIAL ZONES, YARDS ABUTTING RAILROADS, NUMBER OF PRINCIPAL BUILDINGS, PARKING BENEATH BUILDINGS, SIGNS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONE DISTRICTS, OUTDOOR STORAGE IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES, DISPLAY OF MOTOR VEHICLES FOR SALE, AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES FOR RESIDENTIAL USES
Mayor Aronsohn announced that the Public Hearing was open. No one came forward to comment and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing on Ordinance 3493 be continued to February 10, 2016. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
8. RESOLUTIONS
THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTIONS, NUMBERED 15-375 THROUGH 15-411 WERE ADOPTED BY A CONSENT AGENDA, WITH ONE VOTE BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL, AND WERE READ BY TITLE ONLY:
9. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC
Patricia Infantino, 3 Betty Court, commended the Village Council for their enthusiasm relative to the comprehensive multi-family impact studies. Several Councilmembers and Village staff have noted the importance of the studies to the community. There have been many references to due diligence, and she wondered why the Schedler area was not included in these studies, particularly the traffic study. It is time for the Village Council to include the Schedler neighborhood as part of an independent traffic study. There should also be an independent noise, pollution, and safety study for the Schedler neighborhood.
Ms. Infantino noted Mr. Cronin’s comment on the decrease in enrollment in Ridgewood schools. This is a contrast to the comment from the Ridgewood Baseball Softball Association’s (RBSA) that the population was so large that they needed more fields on which to play. She asked for the number of students who play baseball, and if that number is declining, there should be a study as to what will take place five or ten years from now. She noted again that she hopes the enthusiasm for impact studies will be expanded to the Schedler side of town.
Susan Clayville, 399 Queens Court, said she is delighted about the studies being done, and she strongly believes that the same types of studies should be done for the Schedler neighborhood. Independent traffic, financial, noise, air pollution, and safety studies should be done.
Charlie Nowinski, 2 Betty Court, said that the only location in Ridgewood that can accommodate a 90-foot baseball field is Schedler Park. He distributed a drawing to Village Councilmembers, and reviewed the location of various points of interest, including the fact that spectators would be sitting 33 feet from the highway. He played a video he had taken to demonstrate how loud it is in this area. Mr. Nowinski pointed out that there will be increased noise once the trees are removed. He asked how a pitcher will be able to pitch, and he noted that a truck broke through a barrier eight days ago.
Paul D’Arpa, 574 Racetrack Road, said that the Schedler Park area deserves studies. He referred to the guard rail and eight feet of sidewalk, which appear quite dangerous. A smaller field that could be oriented in a different manner might be worth consideration. Mr. D’Arpa said that the 90-foot field brings many safety concerns. He referred to the accident where the truck broke through the barrier, and noted that the stone from the barrier was pushed far into the backyard of a residence. He added that it was a good thing that no one was in the yard right behind the wall.
Claude Bienstock, 39-11 Broadway, Fair Lawn, said he is speaking as a private citizen, and is not representing the Bergen County Board of Realtors, or the New Jersey Association of Realtors. Mr. Bienstock said he appreciates and supports the Village Council’s concern to do what is right for the people of Ridgewood. He asked that the Village Council protect the property values of the people that will be impacted by the development of Schedler Park. He suggested that they do the right thing and what is in the best interests of everyone in the community.
Sal Infantino, 6 Betty Court, said he has spoken to the Village Council on several occasions, and has sent several videos to Councilmembers. He asked for a response to the health concerns he has raised, and he wondered if the Village Council would be consulting a health expert about the information on the damage done to cardiovascular and respiratory systems of children. As a doctor, he cautioned parents about taking their children to play in this location due to health hazards.
Councilwoman Knudsen again stated that she was going to raise the question of studies in this area with Ms. Sonenfeld. The overall exposure of both children and adults to air and noise pollution is problematic, and should be explored to ensure everyone’s safety. She heard what Mr. D'Arpa said and has looked at what has been pointed out in the drawings. She indicated surprise at how close the pedestrians would be walking to the highway. Councilwoman Knudsen said they need to consider how to approach this going forward.
Mayor Aronsohn said that the entire Schedler issue needs to go to the Parks and Recreation Committee for review and comment. The suggestion to involve a medical expert is something that should also be discussed by the Parks and Recreation Committee.
Councilwoman Hauck said that she respects studies that have and will be done, but she doesn’t want to make judgements on where people chose to live or exercise. Dr. Infantino said that there is a difference between living and exercising. The danger from pollution is much greater when exercising because the body processes pollutants differently during exercise, especially for children. There is a lot of data available on this subject, which clearly indicates that it would be irresponsible to have a child play next to Route 17. He supports a park in this area; however, people need to be fully aware of the dangers posed here. He encouraged the Village Council to recognize the importance of retaining the trees as a noise barrier for residents in the area.
Jacqueline Hone, 30 Carriage Lane, said that studies seem to become a moot point as far as Schedler Park is concerned. Route 17 is a dangerous, six lane highway with noise, pollution, and high volume traffic, which is also known as Heroin Highway, yet no one supports studies on this project. Ms. Hone stated that Mayor Aronsohn circulated the County’s response to her questions and comments, but he did not include two pages, which would have clarified that the application was completed incorrectly in the areas of historic preservation and the environment. The environmental factors include State endangered and threatened species such as the bald eagle and black crowned night heron. Ms. Hone asked that these two pages be included. The latest application dated November 15, 2015, includes a detail of budgets and money that will be expended on this project dated September 28th, however, at the meeting of October 14th no information seemed to be available.
Ms. Hone referred to the promise of a 90-foot field that was made, and she is confused because Mayor Aronsohn indicated that the Village Council is still involved in a thought process even though the Village Council signed off on a resolution for a 90-foot field. She always wondered who had been involved in a promise for a 90-foot field. She recently discovered an email from Ralph Currey to a neighborhood resident relative to an annual donation in the $5,000 to $10,000 range towards the debt service of acquisition or development costs of the property. The email stated that money talks, and a cash contribution of even a small amount would indicate how serious the neighborhood was about the preservation of Open Space. The email states that $25 per household would be a good cash contribution. Ms. Hone asked for clarification of this promise. She encouraged studies to be done in the interests of transparency.
Councilman Sedon stated that the Citizens Safety Advisory Committee recently recommended that the appropriate safety studies be done at the Schedler property as development moves on. Ms. Hone asked if this recommendation has been approved. Councilman Sedon commented that at the present time, there is no concrete plan to develop the Schedler property, other than a clean-up.
Ms. Sonenfeld clarified stating that the eagle and the heron were found outside the property which the County found to be acceptable. She added that she asked Ms. Fricke to put the updated grant request on the Village website. Ms. Sonenfeld explained that they were trying to get firm estimates on Phase One, which caused the delay in the submission of the updated package to the County.
Mayor Aronsohn referred to the letter from the County which clearly indicates vindication of accusations made against Ms. Sonenfeld and Ms. Fricke regarding the handling of these applications over the past few years.
Phil Dolce, 625 Kingsbridge Lane, said that there is a part of the plan for Schedler Park that is seldom mentioned. Mr. Dolce indicated that the Open Space Committee recommended the purchase of six additional plots, and he wondered why this was never discussed. In 1997 the Parks Department called for a study of Schedler, which is twelve years before the property was purchased. This study noted a 90-foot field, and a 60-foot field with no trees, as well as the Ward property comprised of a field and additional parking. Mr. Dolce asked that a plan be formulated incorporating the Schedler property and the six other properties. Councilman Pucciarelli said that Mr. Dolce is asking the Open Space Committee to disclose whether it has any plans for the additional acreage. Mr. Dolce agreed, and said they have a right to know how this property is going to be used.
Mr. Dolce asked the Parks, Recreation and Conservation Commission to present a hypothetical schedule for Schedler Park’s 90-foot field, including adult teams that could use the field. This will help to provide much needed information on how the field will be used, as well as traffic, among other things.
Councilwoman Hauck said she thought this could be done because the Engineering Department is doing a study on all of the fields in Ridgewood owned by both the Village and the Board of Education. They are looking at a cost and feasibility assessment of every field. Ms. Sonenfeld commented that the Village Council has not focused on the Schedler property in the last few months because of everything else that is going on, and the Engineering Department is overwhelmed with work. She indicated that plans for Schedler for next year will be discussed during budget meetings, and she confirmed that she has asked Christopher Rutishauser, Village Engineer, to prepare an assessment and inventory of the fields.
Mayor Aronsohn said that at some point in the process, an analysis of the fields is a reasonable request. Mr. Dolce noted that there is an abundance of information on the fields contained in the CMX report, which cost the Village $80,000. He said that his requests for a schedule, and whether or not several other properties are going to be purchased in conjunction with the Schedler property are not unreasonable. He pointed out that the Village Council voted for a 90-foot field, but now indicate that they have no time to think about studies. The facts need to be gathered before any conclusions are made.
Sal Infantino, 6 Betty Court, stated that according to the Bergen County Freeholders the public hearing date relative to the resolution authorizing the receipt of the 2015 Open Space Trust Fund Award recommendations has set January 25, 2016. She asked how the Village knows that it has received this grant award. Ms. Sonenfeld explained that the Bergen County Open Space Committee recommends what it will bring to the Freeholders. The Freeholders will vote on the application in January 2016. The inaudible individual pointed out that the Schedler property is clean at the moment, and no one is hanging around. The wall and the berm should be completed before there is any clean-up because area residents will hear and see the highway when the garage and the dead wood are removed. She added that many people, including her, believe that the entrance to the park should be from Route 17 due to the West Saddle River Road being so narrow.
There were no further comments from the public.
10. RESOLUTION TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION
The following resolution, numbered #15-412, to go into Closed Session, was read in full by the Village Clerk, as follows:
11. ADOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Village Council, on a motion by Councilman Sedon, seconded by Councilwoman Knudsen, and carried unanimously by voice vote, the meeting was adjourned at 12:50 A.M., December 10, 2015.
_________________________________ Paul S. Aronsohn Mayor
_________________________________ Heather A. Mailander Village Clerk
- Hits: 3341