A REGULAR WORK SESSION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGEOF RIDGEWOOD HELD IN THE SYDNEY V. STOLDT, JR., COURTROOM OF THE RIDGEWOOD VILLAGE HALL, 131 NORTH MAPLE AVENUE, RIDGEWOOD, NEW JERSEY, ON WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 28, 2015, AT 7:30 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 7:32 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; Donna Jackson, Deputy Village Clerk; and Matthew Rogers, Village Attorney.
Mayor Aronsohn led those in attendance in the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and the moment of silence in honor of the American men and women serving in our Armed Forces, as well as those who serve as first responders in Ridgewood and throughout the United States.
2. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC
Mayor Aronsohn asked if anyone from the public wished to speak regarding any of the agenda items.
David Rutherford, an attorney with an office at 141 Dayton Street, addressed the Village Council on behalf of RIC Development LLC, and Mr. Richard Harrison, who was also in attendance at the meeting. Mr. Rutherford reminded the Councilmembers that his client, Mr. Harrison, has made an application to build an age-restricted housing development on Prospect Street in Glen Rock, adjacent to the Village’s Sewage Treatment Facility. Mr. Harrison and Mr. Rutherford appeared before the Village Council approximately one year ago to outline their project, and has returned to give Councilmembers an update.
The developer, called Glen Park Village LLC, has been formed and taken title to the property. The Borough of Glen Rock Planning Board has completed a re-examination of their Master Plan, which directly addresses the need for additional age-restricted housing in Glen Rock. The Mayor and Council of the Borough of Glen Rock is aware of the proposal, and Mr. Rutherford said they are scheduled to appear before the Glen Rock Planning Board on February 2, 2015, to discuss drafting an ordinance that would re-zone the property which will permit such use and impose appropriate bulk requirements. The ordinance will then be forwarded to the Mayor and Council of Glen Rock for their consideration. The project involves the acquisition, by Mr. Harrison, of a small strip of land owned by the Village, which is the former driveway to the Sewage Treatment Facility. The strip is approximately 10-15 feet wide, and 400-500 feet deep, and is no longer used by the Village. It is located on the south side of the site. Mr. Harrison will also acquire access rights to the development from the Village-owned roadway serving the Sewage Treatment Facility. Mr. Rutherford stated that this information was previously provided to the Councilmembers, as well as traffic studies and other data, approximately 18 months ago. He added that the gestation period for this project has been very long, but he is now confident that it is moving forward.
Mr. Rutherford commented that the reason for their appearance at this meeting is solely to inform the Councilmembers that Mr. Harrison is very committed to the project, and hopes to continue to move forward with it. They intend to let the Glen Rock officials speak for themselves, and Mr. Rutherford chose his words very carefully, so as not to appear presumptuous. However, it is their expectation that the property will be favorably received in Glen Rock. That is based upon the actions taken by the Glen Rock Planning Board thus far, as well as the actions they expect will be taken by the Glen Rock Planning Board with respect to the zoning ordinance amendments. Clearly, the Glen Rock Mayor and Council will have to make the ultimate determination at that time, and Mr. Rutherford said that his client respects their right to do so.
As further evidence of his commitment to the project, Mr. Harrison proceeded at his own risk and without presumption to continue with preparations of the site plan, the architectural drawings, and to file applications with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), and the Bergen County Planning Board. The reason for doing so was to identify early in the planning process any issues that those entities may have, so that they can be incorporated into the design. After the zoning ordinance amendment process has been completed, Mr. Harrison will be prepared to file an application with the Glen Rock Planning Board for site plan approval. It is hoped that all of that can occur within a fairly short timeframe. Mr. Rutherford noted that, although this is not listed as an agenda item for the Work Session portion of the meeting, but is on the agenda for the Closed Session meeting, his only intent was to update the Councilmembers of the current status of the project. Mr. Rutherford requested that the Councilmembers give favorable consideration to their requests, and he asked that they consult further with the Village Manager and Village Attorney concerning those requests. Mr. Rutherford said he is also available to speak to Mr. Rogers whenever it is convenient to him.
Bob Fuhrman, 49 Clinton Avenue, noticed that Clinton Avenue is on the agenda for discussion this evening, and Mr. Fuhrman came to this meeting as a resident of Clinton Avenue, as well as a representative of the Citizens Safety Advisory Committee (CSAC). He noted that the Village Council, under the guise of safety, turned the issue over to CSAC in October. It was determined that there were no safety issues on the street at that time. In attendance at that meeting were the President of the Board of Education and the head of the Safety Committee of the Ridge Homeschool Association. Everyone agreed that there were no safety issues on Clinton Avenue at that time. At the Work Session meeting in October 2014, the Councilmembers voted to support that finding, but the issue was given back to CSAC in January 2015, at which time it was re-confirmed that there were no safety issues. Several residents of Clinton Avenue were in attendance at both of the previous meetings, and they seemed to spend a lot of time doing their due diligence. Mr. Fuhrman stated that if there is another issue besides anything concerning safety, the residents of that area would like to know that so that they can be addressed.
Regarding parking, Mr. Fuhrman said he gave information to Councilwoman Hauck about parking meters that he was able to obtain on a recent trip to California. However, he asked a question regarding the numerous restaurants in Ridgewood. Mr. Fuhrman assumed that the majority of people who eat in those restaurants are not Ridgewood residents, and he thinks it would be beneficial if they were to subsidize some of the parking enforcement in Ridgewood. To that end, he suggested that the operation times of the meters be extended until 8:00 P.M. Mr. Fuhrman estimated that would increase revenues by approximately 20%. Ms. Sonenfeld and Mayor Aronsohn thanked Mr. Fuhrman for his comments, and Ms. Sonenfeld noted that parking meter technology is the first item to be discussed in the agenda this evening.
There were no other comments from the public at this time, and Mayor Aronsohn closed the time for public comment.
3. DISCUSSION
As Mayor Aronsohn pointed out, there are now four topics in the discussion area of the agenda. The added topic is for parking, which Mayor Aronsohn suggested could be added to show the commitment of the Councilmembers and Village Manager to parking, as well as to reflect that parking is been discussed at nearly every meeting in the last three months.
a. Parking:
1.) Parking Meter Technology
Ms. Sonenfeld mentioned that the current meters only accept quarters for payment. She and Janet Fricke, Assistant to the Village Manager, wanted to bring to everyone’s attention what the Village should be doing from a variety of perspectives. The goals are to enhance and simplify customer parking; provide more options to Ridgewood residents and non-residents; optimize cash controls and reconciliations for the longer-term; and leverage technology that is moving rapidly forward in this field. There is now a magazine that is published every three months dedicated completely to parking technology. Ms. Sonenfeld mentioned that a team was formed to discuss and analyze the parking situation, which is comprised of Mayor Aronsohn; Ms. Fricke; Dylan Hansen, Systems Administrator; Captain Luthcke of the Ridgewood Police Department; Ms. Mailander; Jim O’Connell, Director of the Signal Division; Christopher Rutishauser, Village Engineer; Councilman Sedon; and Ms. Sonenfeld. The team met with many different vendors and looked at various approaches and products to deal with the parking problem. In addition, Ms. Sonenfeld presented three alternatives to what can be done in lieu of parking meters. Two of the alternatives are capital-intensive and require quite a bit of money. One of the alternatives is a pilot program, to which Ms. Sonenfeld will be giving a bit more focus due to the fact that the members believe it makes a lot of sense. If the Councilmembers are interested in the other two alternatives, they can be explored further before a decision is made.
Ms. Fricke presented the report to the Councilmembers. She pointed out that McKay Multi-Space Solutions has had a long history in this business, and they presented a multi-space solution which would mean purchasing multi-space kiosks for the parking lots, and new meter heads for the streets. The discussion has always separated street parking from parking lots, and that has been addressed in discussions with the various vendors. The kiosks and the meter heads would take multiple forms of payment, either coins or electronic payments. Kiosks cost $10,000 each, and 11 kiosks would be required for the parking lots in Ridgewood, for a total of $110,000. Some of the lots would require two kiosks. New meter heads for the streets to replace the 512 single heads in the Village are $500 apiece, for a total of $256,000. The meter heads would accept multiple forms of payment. In order to secure the cash that could be inserted into the meters, metal secured canisters would be installed at a cost of $25 apiece, for a total of $12,800. New collection equipment would also have to be purchased that takes a sealed canister and puts it on moving equipment to keep it secure as it goes to be counted. The cost for the new collection equipment is to be determined. The 96 duplex meters would have to be retrofitted to single head meters due to the fact that the canisters will not fit into those meters, and that cost is estimated to be $48,000. Other potential costs include signage and ramps to get to the kiosks, which must be accessible to everyone. The pros for this option are that it allows better management of coin collection and maintenance; provides multiple payment options; gives the Village enhanced control over the cash collected; and allows automated reporting and reconciliation of payments. The cons are that it would require a significant capital cost of approximately $500,000 with some costs to be determined; maintenance of the hardware; the physical collection of the coins; and the fact that it is not cutting-edge technology. Ms. Fricke pointed out that it is an important place to start when examining the options available.
The second vendor is Digital Payment Technologies, which provides multi-space kiosks, which would be put in the streets, as well as the parking lots. Their kiosks are $9000 apiece, and 79 of them would be required in Ridgewood, for a total cost of $702,000. Each kiosk covers approximately 12 parking spaces. A license plate reader can be used to assess whether a customer has any outstanding parking fees due for an additional cost. Currently, there are two police cars equipped with license plate readers, and more investment in those readers would be required if that technology is chosen. Ms. Sonenfeld commented that this is the new way of utilizing parking technology. Years ago, the parking method involved paying for a parking space, getting the receipt, and placing the receipt on the dashboard. Then, people could pay for space with a number that was painted on the ground on each space, which could be obscured by snow or other impediments. It is now generally agreed that license plate technology is much more convenient, and there is a lot of automation associated with license plate readers and this new technology. Ms. Fricke added that the pros associated with Digital Payment Technologies are the multiple types of payment options available, as well as the fact that they would cover multiple spaces, and the convenience of the license plate readers. The con is the capital costs involved.
The third vendor is Parkmobile, which is used by many other communities, including Glen Rock. The technology involves parking by an app, or people can call Parkmobile and state their location and pay the fee that way. Identification is done by license plates, and users are alerted via text message when 15 minutes are left on the meter. Ms. Fricke suggested that the approach for this technology could be doing a pilot in all of the parking lots, or choose certain lots for a pilot program. Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that her idea was that phase 1 of this approach would be to start the technology in all of the lots. However, the Chestnut Street parking lot and the Route 17 Park-and-Ride would allow users to choose between their Ridgewood Parking Permit (RPP), and using Parkmobile. No coins would be used in those lots. One reason for this is that there are currently no parking meters in the Chestnut Street lot. The majority of people using the Route 17 Park-and-Ride are hangtag users. In addition, Mr. Rutishauser will be discussing a new design for that lot which will increase the number of spaces available in that lot by 42 or 43, and no meters will be installed at those parking spots. The side benefit to this is that it will stop moving coins through the system, which is a good thing. This would also not require any additional installation of hardware. Phase 2 of the program would expand the technology to include street parking, and an evaluation could be done at that time for the train station to determine whether it should be open to RPP holders or for Parkmobile users only. Using this technology for street parking would allow users to pay by quarters if they wish, or they can use their smart phones to pay. It is thought that perhaps the parking lot at the west end of the train station could eventually switch to RPP holders and Parkmobile users only. However, that is not being recommended in the first phase. The pros of this program include the fact that there is no capital outlay; it is great for a pilot, because there is minimal impact; it is very simple; it is easily reversible; it gives the Village enhanced controls over coin processing; a decrease in the amount of coinage; the ability to automate with the automated license plate system (ALPS) reader; this is a cutting-edge use of technology; the meters from the other municipalities lot can be harvested to use in other locations; other municipalities are using this product successfully; and it allows for enhanced financial reporting. The cons include the convenience fee per transaction ($.35) paid by the users; the credit card fees, which can be included in the price of Village permits; there could be a problem with some users’ comfort level with this technology; and the cost of signage, because each space has to be labeled, which is approximately $1,000. In addition, Ms. Fricke pointed out significant side benefits to using Parkmobile, including the fact that it enhances working policies and options by addressing the potential for infrequent Ridgewood parking users, as well as part-time CBD employees. Ms. Sonenfeld explained that day passes could be issued to Ridgewood residents, so people who go into the city several times a month could buy such passes. Many people who work at home commute to their offices once or twice a month and they have been asking why their needs were not considered in the new parking programs.
Ms. Fricke mentioned that there is concurrent implementation of the secure canisters. In phase 1, all of the single head street meters can be replaced with secure canisters at a cost of $25 each, for a total of $12,800. In addition, the potential exists to remove the remaining 96 duplex meters and replace them with Parkmobile. Face to involves evaluating the usage of coins in the parking lots and deciding when to implement the phone/RPP only technology, or if the canisters should be replaced.
Ms. Sonenfeld commented that one of the thoughts expressed about technology is that it is moving quickly, and there are many other features of the smartphone technology that have not been discussed. It is clear to all of the team members that very soon, meter heads will be obsolete. Therefore, there is still the dilemma of whether to invest $500,000-$700,000 in something that may be considered “antique” several years from now. The committee members agreed unanimously that it would be a good idea to implement a pilot program for the next 4-6 months and see how it goes.
Mayor Aronsohn thanked Ms. Sonenfeld and Ms. Fricke for the presentation. He noted that a lot of effort has gone into this evaluation of the different programs. Mayor Aronsohn stated that basically, there are three different options for the Village. One is the kiosk idea; another is to change the meter heads (in conjunction with kiosks), which is a big capital expense, but would allow the Village to accept credit card and other electronic payments; and the final option is to put a Parkmobile sticker on the existing meters to allow drivers to choose between using an app on their smart phones or calling to pay their parking fees. Mayor Aronsohn supports going with the Parkmobile technology, because it does not cost anything to implement. It will also be an added convenience to residents and other people who visit Ridgewood, and there is also the added cash controls that must be considered. Moreover, it can be implemented rather quickly. Ms. Sonenfeld estimated that the program could be running in approximately 6-8 weeks. Mayor Aronsohn asked if, after hearing from the other Councilmembers about this, Ms. Sonenfeld could provide some more details about how this program will help part-time commuters, as well as part-time employees.
Councilman Sedon agreed with Mayor Aronsohn that Parkmobile seems to be the way to go at this time, because there is no capital outlay involved, and it offers the Village a good opportunity to examine how people park, and what they used to pay their parking fees. It is also easily reversible, so if it does not work out, it can be changed.
Councilwoman Hauck thanked Ms. Fricke and Ms. Sonenfeld for the presentation. She added that this is something that has been long overdue, and there will be problems to deal with when it is initially implemented, but it seems like Parkmobile is easy for people to understand and use, although she did point out that there might be some problems with senior citizens using their credit cards and phones to pay for parking. Councilwoman Hauck asked if any smart phone is compatible with the technology. Ms. Sonenfeld answered that if the app is downloaded, it can be used from any smart phone. However, everyone has the opportunity to call to pay the fee, instead of using the app. Ms. Fricke added that PayPal can also be used to pay Parkmobile fees. Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that along the Main and Bergen train lines, many of the train station parking lots only allow Parkmobile for payment. The fact that it is so common among so many communities was another reason why Ms. Sonenfeld said this option was unanimously approved by the team members. Ms. Fricke noted that people will still have the option of using quarters to pay for the parking, and Mayor Aronsohn emphasized that this is a transition, and that is why people will be given the option to use quarters to pay for the parking on a temporary basis.
Councilman Pucciarelli noted that this is a leading area in which the technology is moving from hardware to software, and he would not support any significant expenditure in hardware because it is clear that any investment in hardware purchased would be rendered obsolete within the next five years. He also pointed out that it is far easier to update software technology, rather than updating hardware.
Councilwoman Knudsen commended Ms. Sonenfeld and Ms. Fricke for their presentation, and she said she also believes that Parkmobile is the way to go due to the likelihood that they meter system will become obsolete in the near future. She asked if Ms. Sonenfeld contact any other municipalities to find out what their complaints were, and if there were any concerns about the $.35 fee, which Councilwoman Knudsen considers is the cost of doing business. Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that the fee in Glen Rock is higher than the one that is proposed for Ridgewood. She added that the concern is that if someone parks for an hour for $.50, that person is paying $.35 fee on top of that, which almost doubles the fee. The Village cannot afford to absorb that fee, although the Village will absorb the credit card fees, which is only a matter of pennies. Ms. Sonenfeld stated that recommended to her that anyone who uses Parkmobile should maximize the parking to three hours, so the $.35 fee is paid for the three-hour parking window. Councilwoman Knudsen asked if, when a driver leaves a paid parking space, any remaining time stays on the meter. Ms. Sonenfeld said it does not, and that the meter/kiosk will reset to zero as a driver leaves that space. Finally, Councilwoman Knudsen asked whether the enhanced technology and reporting services provide an opportunity to figure out which parking areas are more and less active, and whether that could be used to enhance the Village’s parking program. Ms. Sonenfeld said that could be done, if that technology is used. It cannot be used if people pay with coins.
Ms. Sonenfeld emphasized that in order to further enhance the security of the quarters, secure canisters are being considered as part of any of the three options. The canisters would be purchased, and they would be locked. No person will be handling any of the quarters in the single head meters.
Mayor Aronsohn asked Ms. Sonenfeld to give more detail about how this technology could be convenient for part-time commuters and part-time employees. Ms. Sonenfeld responded that, from the part-time employees’ point of view, there are two alternatives. Based on a suggestion made by Councilman Sedon, part-time employees in the CBD could be allowed to purchase stickers that would allow them repeat parking privileges at the Cottage Place parking lot. The benefit to that is that if they need a parking space for five hours, they can prepay for the first three hours, and return to the meter at the end of that time and insert quarters – and they would not have to move their cars. An alternative to that would be to allow a part-time employee to purchase a day pass at Cottage Place through Parkmobile for approximately $6-$8 per day, which would be registered to his/her license plate, and s/he could leave the car in the same spot for the day. They passes must be purchased through desktop computers, not through smart phones, and they can be printed, or accessed by license plates through smart phones.
Councilwoman Knudsen noted that the Parkmobile program seems to be very customizable, and she asked if it would be possible to designate a lot, such as the Cottage Place lot, as one in which repeat parking would be allowed. Ms. Sonenfeld answered that she does not believe that can be done at this time, but she has been in discussions with their liaison to their technical team, who is investigating some of these issues. Mayor Aronsohn clarified that the discussion involves two different populations: infrequent commuters, and CBD employees. The reason for the focus is due to the fact that there have been many changes in parking policies, and which have had an impact on those two groups more than any others. He pointed out that there seem to be two solutions available at this time that will meet the needs of both of those populations. Ms. Sonenfeld continued by saying that it is now necessary to update the parking ordinance to recognize those two policy changes affecting CBD employees and the infrequent commuters. She said that Mr. Rutishauser would be working on those changes.
Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that there was to have been a CBD forum with CBD employees, but unfortunately, it had to be canceled due to inclement weather. It has not yet been rescheduled, and Ms. Sonenfeld wondered if the CBD employees have been informed of the plan to reschedule it. However, that meeting will not be held before the next Village Council meeting. She suggested that the information could be distributed via the Chamber of Commerce and the Ridgewood Guild to all employees in Ridgewood.
2.) Award Professional Services Contract – Environmental Engineering Services for Hudson Street Parking Lot
Ms. Sonenfeld stated that this relates to the environmental engineering survey. Mr. Rutishauser explained that, as Ms. Sonenfeld mentioned, this resolution will award the contract for that service at the Hudson Street parking lot. The study will determine if there are any environmental problems in the sub-surface of the lot that would complicate or impede construction of a parking garage. The RFP was issued, and the recommendation is to award it to the lowest bidder, which was First Environment. Ms. Sonenfeld added that the Village Council conditionally approved $100,000 from the capital budget for this contract, and she pointed out that the lowest bidder came in at $199,983. She asked Mr. Rutishauser to explain why that would be a worst-case scenario. Mr. Rutishauser responded that if no contamination is found, the cost will be much lower. However, if contamination is found, Mr. Rutishauser allowed for that eventuality, and prices have been established for the various investigations, sampling, and laboratory analytics that will be necessary to determine the extent of any contamination. If the contamination is significant, the Village would also have to take steps to remediate that contamination. At this time, there is no indication that any contamination that might exist is significant. Ms. Sonenfeld explained that in the worst-case scenario, if contamination is found, she and Mr. Rutishauser would have to come back before the Councilmembers to notify them of that situation, and to get authorization to proceed with the next steps. She noted that they are trying to move forward quickly to get a parking garage built, and while the Village is currently working with the Bergen County Improvement Authority (BCIA), this study will have to be completed no matter what else occurs, and this saves a lot of time.
Councilman Pucciarelli pointed out that it might be beneficial to have this study completed, even if there were no plans to build a parking garage at that location, unless there was a plan to keep the property exactly as it is. The Village is the owner of the property, and its condition should be known.
Mr. Rutishauser commented that the proposal also includes provisions that, at various stages during the work, reports will be forwarded to the Councilmembers, and the successful respondent will be required to attend several Public Meetings of the Village Council, in addition to meeting with Village staff periodically.
Councilman Sedon noted that there has been some contamination found at North Walnut Street, where there are several auto repair facilities, gas stations, and other similar establishments. He asked if there any indications that there are any similar conditions at Hudson Street. Mr. Rutishauser answered that nothing of that nature has been brought to his attention, but this study will ensure that every eventuality is examined and investigated. Preliminary inquiries have been made through the Ridgewood Fire Department, and no spill number records for that site have been found, although Mr. Rutishauser also pointed that those records have only been maintained for a certain number of years. It is possible that contaminants that have been in the ground for a longer period of time could be found, although no one hopes that will happen.
Mayor Aronsohn asked about the timing of this study, and Mr. Rutishauser responded that the consultant could start working on the first report immediately upon execution of the contracts with the Village, which would occur after the Village Council adopts the resolution and the notice to proceed can be given.
Councilman Sedon asked if everything proceeds smoothly and no contamination is found, what would be the final cost for the study. Mr. Rutishauser answered that the cost would include the first report and the subsequent report, but no borings, sampling, or other investigations, which would only be required if there any indications that there are areas of concern on the property that would require investigation. Mr. Rutishauser said he could not say what that best-case scenario cost would be.
Councilwoman Knudsen asked for confirmation that this study would be minimally disruptive to operations at the parking lot. Mr. Rutishauser confirmed this, adding that occasionally, it might be necessary to close a few parking spaces, similar to what was done in previous boring investigations in the North Walnut Street lot. If any wells have to be installed, they will be flush-mounted so cars can park over them.
3.) Increase Parking Capacity at Route 17
Mr. Rutishauser explained that Engineering Department examined the current arrangement at this lot. He pointed out that some of the spaces at the Route 17 lot belong to Air Brook and New Jersey Transit, and the Village owns the spaces in the perimeter lot. This lot is operated under a three-party arrangement among the Village, New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT), and New Jersey Transit. Mr. Rutishauser has been in contact with both of the other parties, and he has to give one more piece of information to NJDOT before the work can be implemented. The plan is to remove some of the large concrete islands in the lot. Ms. Sonenfeld commented that there have been a few complaints from residents and non-residents saying that when they get to the parking lot, it is completely full. This will address that issue. It is estimated that the cost will be approximately $17,000. Mr. Rutishauser confirmed this, adding that most of the work involves removing the concrete islands and replacing them with asphalt, and when the weather improves, the Signal Division will do the striping to lay out the new spaces. Mayor Aronsohn asked how many spots are currently in the lot, and how many will be added with this new plan. Mr. Rutishauser answered that he and it is a gain of approximately 42-44 spaces, and the lot currently has 79 spaces that belong to the Village. Ms. Sonenfeld reminded everyone that those lots will be restricted to RPP holders, or Parkmobile users.
4.) Bergen County Improvement Authority
Mayor Aronsohn stated that he and Councilman Sedon met with the Deputy Executive Director of the BCIA, Mauro Raguseo, about the parking garage issue. In addition, Mayor Aronsohn spoke with the County Executive, Jim Tedesco, who is supportive of moving forward with this plan. However, the County offices are currently in transition mode, so matters are not proceeding very rapidly. The meeting with Mr. Raguseo went very well. Mayor Aronsohn and Councilman Sedon explained what has occurred over the past year between the Village and the BCIA, as well as talking about the history of the parking challenges that have existed in Ridgewood. Mr. Raguseo was familiar with those challenges. Mayor Aronsohn and Councilman Sedon accompanied Mr. Raguseo to the Hudson Street parking lot for walkthrough, and they walked around the entire block to allow him to understand the importance of having a parking facility there. Mayor Aronsohn said he made it very clear that the Village would like to work with the BCIA, but if they are not prepared to work with the Village for whatever reason, the Village is prepared to move forward on its own. Mr. Raguseo understood, and all parties agreed to keep the conversation moving forward. It seems that once the transition has been completed, everything will proceed as previously agreed. Mayor Aronsohn believes Mr. Raguseo understands this is something that would be beneficial not only to Ridgewood, but would also benefit the County, because many people in Bergen County come to Ridgewood for various reasons.
Councilman Pucciarelli commented that it is a perfect use of the County’s bonding capability, and he hoped they can see this is what they should be doing. Parking in Ridgewood is a regional issue, due to the fact that Ridgewood has a large train station, and it serves many people from outside and inside Ridgewood.
Ms. Sonenfeld noted it is a good thing that the Village has the same bond rating as the County, because it makes it possible for the Village to get work done if the County chooses not to participate.
b. Budget:
1.) Capital
a.) Paving
Ms. Sonenfeld explained that this is a pre-request for capital funds based on time-sensitive issues. The 2015 budget review is scheduled for February 28, 2015, at which time the entire capital budget will be presented. As was done in 2014, paving has been moved up the head of the budget review, because there are a couple of items that need to be presented for approval. This is not an expense at this time, but will be an ordinance authorizing a capital for this work. The request for paving is for approximately $500,000 in 2015, which is significantly less than the $1.6 million appropriated in 2014. The reason it is lower is because, even though the 2014 paving dollars were approved prior to approval of the capital budget, it was not done in time for those funds to be spent and the work to be done. There is approximately $1.5 million remaining of those funds, but it is felt that the maximum that should be requested for 2015 is $500,000. The $500,000 also includes something that has been discussed several times over the past year, which is the installation of new curbs on West Glen Avenue, along with some sidewalks in selected areas, especially in and around the train trestle to make it safer for pedestrians. New curbs will also be installed in other areas of the Village, specifically along Woodland Avenue, and other areas that were not done as part of the Northwest Bergen Co-Op Program several years ago. It is also important to note that every year, the Village applies for a grant from NJDOT for resurfacing, and an application was made this year for Morningside Road. The anticipated amount is approximately $140,000, but due to the current economic situation, it is doubtful that the funds will be forthcoming. If the funds are not received, the $300,000 that has been allocated from the capital budget for the resurfacing of Morningside Road will be reconsidered, and a reassessment will be made to see if there are streets in worse shape, and if so, the funds can be reallocated to those areas.
This will be put on a resolution for the February 11, 2015 Public Meeting.
b.) Technology
Ms. Sonenfeld noted that the Village has been exploring various technology platforms to support the Village. The current technology in use at Village Hall is far behind the times in many ways, and this presentation focuses on the Building Department, and the work that Tom Yotka, Director of the Building Department, has been doing in his efforts to revitalize the Building Department. It is hoped that this can move forward as soon as a decision is made. Several platforms are being considered, although no action will be taken without approval from the Village Council.
Mayor Aronsohn commended Mr. Yotka for his efforts as Director of the Building Department, noting that many compliments have been received regarding the way the department is currently operating. Mr. Yotka said he wanted to discuss a single-solution software package that he has reviewed which will allow the Village to integrate, streamline, and automate various administrative processes, particularly in the Building Department, but can be expanded to other departments, as well. The software will give the Village the capability to manage complaints and inquiries, and it will codify/identify what types of issues are faced on a daily basis; how often they occur; and how they are mitigated. The entire program is very user-friendly, using virtually point-and-click technology. There are drop-down menus that allow users to move through processes much faster. It will place electronic files at the users’ fingertips, without leaving a desk or workstation to search for files in cabinets. One of the most exciting pieces to the software, according to Mr. Yotka, is the on-line portal. It will give the public better access to information. Mr. Yotka said they have been searching for a more innovative and flexible way to manage workflows as well as information. At this time, the processes and systems in the Building Department are outdated. They need to be significantly improved, and that can be accomplished through the use of this technology. Mr. Yotka would like to link all applications, inspections, permits, certificates, and any potential violations into a single system, and that capability does not currently exist. Having the resources available through the desktops will cut down response times significantly.
A key component to this, as with every system, is an integrated mapping system that Mr. Yotka would like to incorporate into this software. It is a separate component, but it is very integral to the technology platform. It is expected that in the future, if the mapping system is incorporated, a map of the Village can be accessed, and activities occurring in a particular parcel of the Village can be identified with a simple click of the mouse. Those types of activities include permits; pet licensing; applications to the Zoning Board or Planning Board; etc. Mr. Yotka emphasized that all of this falls under the heading of “Customer Service,” which is a very broad term, but no one seems to know what it means. For his department, it means that response times can be decreased, and his staff will be able to track and better manage the amount of time it takes from when an application for a permit is received to the time that the permit is issued and fees are collected. Mr. Yotka stated that the goal is not only quantitative that qualitative reporting, and improved customer service.
One of the most exciting things about this technology is the citizen portal that is available on one of the programs. That will allow customers the ability to track their permits, as well as to schedule inspections on-line from anywhere. A more exciting detail is that in the very near future, permit applications can be completed and submitted on-line. Mr. Yotka noted that this will apply only to minor work permits, such as roofing; siding; front stairs; boilers and water heaters; and other items of that nature. He added that improved technology also means the capability of inspectors to record and maintain the data in the field using iPads. The platform is completely mobile, and will have the same capabilities whether in the office or out in the field.
Finally, Mr. Yotka emphasized that the goal is to provide answers immediately; cut down response times; increase efficiency; become more effective; and answer customer inquiries a more timely fashion. Technology is vital to accomplishing this, and to the success of the Building Department in the way services are delivered. Mr. Yotka stated that if this technology is not implemented, and the status quo is maintained, it will be necessary to increase administrative staff.
In closing, Mr. Yotka said that it will be necessary to integrate the entire system, starting with the Building Department. The cost will be approximately $88,000 to do everything. That includes the licensing fee; data conversion fee; and installation and training for five departments. The licensing fee covers 25 users. The Building Department has 10 users, leaving an additional 15 spots for other users, which is enough to cover multiple departments. In addition, new hardware for the Building Department is included, as well as a new server. The server is necessary because the current server is not capable of supporting the new system. All of this can be done for the cost stated. Ms. Sonenfeld commented that the requested capital expenditure approval will be approximately $100,000, to cover any contingencies.
Mayor Aronsohn thanked Mr. Yotka for the presentation, and his efforts in putting it together. Mayor Aronsohn agreed that this new technology sounds exciting, and he believes it is also necessary. It will not only enhance the effectiveness and state of the Building Department, but will also help the responsiveness and interaction with other departments. It is critically important to improve customer service and improve the experience for residents. Mayor Aronsohn finds it especially noteworthy that the software used by several different departments. He asked if it would be possible for Ms. Sonenfeld or Mr. Yotka to give a bit more detail about that. Ms. Sonenfeld noted that pet licensing and OPRA requests could be taken care of on-line. The software also allows an interface with the Engineering Department. Mr. Yotka noted that it will allow tracking of approvals through the Planning Board, Zoning Board, and Health Department, as well as the Engineering Department. As far as OPRA requests are concerned, Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that currently, there is no way of knowing how many such requests are received on a daily basis, or whether they are being satisfied, and how long it takes to fulfill the requests.
Councilwoman Knudsen commented that this would allow processing of application fees; licensing fees; and other items of that nature on-line, which would help to streamline the entire process and generate more activity from the public. Mr. Yotka responded that it will calculate all Building Department fees, but the same payment process will have to be maintained, unless the Village decides to switch to an automated payment process, perhaps in 2016. Councilman Knudsen thinks that allowing broader application of the software is a great opportunity.
Ms. Sonenfeld stated that Mr. Yotka would be presenting the budget for the Building Department at the February budget meeting, and he will cover the overall budget at that time, which will include this software. Ms. Sonenfeld recalled that for this year, she has been charged with focusing on overhauling the Building Department and streamlining its processes while improving customer service. That change will require investment, to which Mayor Aronsohn agreed.
Councilman Pucciarelli pointed out that Mr. Yotka was not hired to “mind the shop,” because the “shop” was not working very well. One of the goals he was given was to improve customer service in his department, and Councilman Pucciarelli is particularly impressed with the customer portal, because previously when a resident had a building permit application pending, the only way to check on its status was to ask the builder to contact the Building Department, and builders often refused to do so. All of that had to be done in person, which is very inconvenient. Mr. Yotka was asked to make the Building Department more customer-friendly and to streamline the process, and Councilman Pucciarelli acknowledged that Mr. Yotka has responded to that. One of the questions Mr. Yotka said he asked of the vendors during this process was whether customers could schedule their own inspections, which raised a lot of concerns in his department, because there is the potential that 15-18 inspections could be scheduled in one day, and perhaps only four the next day. The system includes a cutoff point, so if a customer chose a particular date, the system will show how many appointments are already set for that date, up to a maximum allowed that can be set by the Village. Councilman Pucciarelli noted that restaurant reservations in Ridgewood can be made on-line, and it is appropriate that services, such as building inspections, can also be done on-line.
Councilwoman Hauck asked how many other municipalities have this service available. Ms. Sonenfeld answered that one of the technologies being considered is in use in more than 300 municipalities, and the one that they have been focusing on is being used in more than 200 municipalities. Mr. Yotka visited a community and observed how the technology functions, and it was very impressive. During the time of his visit, which covered approximately 1½ hours, four inquiries were made at the counter, and the clerk was able to answer every one of them without leaving her desk. Ms. Sonenfeld added that it was decided that for budget purposes, 2015 would be the year of technology investment.
Councilman Sedon thanked Mr. Yotka for his efforts, and added that anything that makes the lives of Village residents easier and helps to organize the Building Department is a great thing. He looks forward to seeing the technology implemented.
c.) Ambulance
Ms. Sonenfeld noted that the ambulance is back in Ridgewood. She reminded everyone that this resolution was withdrawn a couple of months ago due to some confusion over how much money the Village Council had previously approved toward the purchase of the ambulance. Chief Brian Pullman of the Office of Emergency Management had one figure, and the Finance Department had another figure.
Chief Pullman said he was requesting additional funding for the replacement of one of the ambulances. The ambulance to be replaced is a 2000 Ford ambulance body, and is currently in its 15th year of service. In previous years, $105,000 was approved through 2011 and 2013. The total cost of the new ambulance is $184,266, including the trade-in value of the old ambulance. The replacement ambulance will offer some new features. One new feature is that it will be a four-wheel-drive vehicle. Some additional safety features have been included in the price, including an airbag system in the rear of the ambulance to help protect volunteer EMTs; and a rear camera to help reduce blind spots.
Chief Pullman noted that there are three ambulances in Ridgewood, and they are all needed. The call volume supports that number of vehicles. It is critical to always have two ambulances in service at all times. However, ambulances require maintenance on a regular basis, as well as unscheduled maintenance. Chief Pullman pointed out that there were two major issues last year because the Village only had two ambulances for an extended period of time. One of the ambulances required a major engine overhaul, and was out of service for more than a month. The second ambulance, which is also the newest ambulance, also had an engine overhaul, and was out of service for approximately one month.
Chief Pullman researched neighboring communities to see if any of them has three or more ambulances in service, and based predominantly on their call volume, it seems that any communities that have call volumes as high as 350-1,200 calls have at least two ambulances. Towns that have more than 1,200 per year have at least three ambulances, and some of them have up to six. Ridgewood currently gets approximately 1,500 EMS calls in the year, so that would indicate the necessity of having a minimum of three vehicles. Another factor that has to be considered is the lifespan of ambulances, because they are very expensive to replace. Chief Pullman commented that there are cheaper options available, but given the replacement cycle in Ridgewood, he thought it was important to invest the funds to get enhanced features, and a well-constructed vehicle that will last a long period of time. Previously, ambulances were replaced every 8-10 years, which seems to be the standard for the communities in this area. However, in recent years, Ridgewood has been keeping their vehicles longer than that. If the funds are approved, Chief Pullman will return with the award of the bid, and an additional nine months will be required to manufacture and deliver the ambulance. That means that the current vehicle will have been in service for 16 years.
In addition the ambulance that is to be replaced, Chief Pullman mentioned the two other vehicles, which are 2003 and 2007 Fords, which prove an aging fleet. The ambulance to be replaced has nearly 72,000 miles on it, and over 9,000 engine hours. Chief Pullman commented that one hour of engine life is approximately equal to 25 miles on the odometer, or approximately 227,000 miles of wear and tear on the chassis. The other two ambulances are comparable in mileage and engine hours.
Chief Pullman stated that an RFP has been issued, and he was prepared to award the bid in December 2014. The vendor has extended the pricing from that bid if Chief Pullman can proceed as soon as possible, because they can use the chassis that was ordered last year. That is why there is some urgency in moving forward with this now.
Mayor Aronsohn thanked Chief Pullman for putting all this together, and for his patience on this matter. He agreed with Chief Pullman that the recent ice storm underscored the need for a new ambulance.
Councilwoman Knudsen also thanked Chief Pullman for his presentation, and she was surprised to see that there is an ambulance from 2000 with that kind of mileage on it still in use. She was also amazed that the Village does not have an ambulance with four-wheel-drive capability available.
Councilman Pucciarelli stated that he presumes there is a warranty that comes with the vehicle, although he surmised that it would not cover everything. Chief Pullman confirmed this, adding that the Ford chassis comes with a standard warranty, and there is a lifetime warranty on the construction and fabrication of the ambulance itself. “Lifetime” means for as long as it is owned by the Village. Other components include warranties for up to 10 years.
2.) Award Contract – Physician for Child Health Conference
Ms. Sonenfeld noted that this is an annual contract, and it is shared with the Borough of Glen Rock. This will be put on a resolution for the February 11, 2015 Public Meeting.
3.) Award Contract – Servicing & Repair of Potable Water Pumping Facilities
Ms. Sonenfeld explained that this is the award of the second year of a contract that was already approved Rinbrand Well Drilling, for the service and repair of wells, pumps, motors, and pipes. They were the lowest bidder last year, and the Village has had a good experience with them. This will be put on a resolution for the February 11, 2015 Public Meeting.
4.) Award Contract – Servicing & Repair of Electric Source
Ms. Sonenfeld noted that this is another contract in its second year, for service and repair of an electrical source at Ridgewood Water. The Village has had a good experience with Roberge Electric Company, also. This will be put on a resolution for the February 11, 2015 Public Meeting.
5.) Award Contract – Furnishing & Delivering Sodium Hypochlorite Solution – Ridgewood Water
Ms. Sonenfeld commented that this contract is also in its second year for furnishing in delivering sodium hypochlorite solution for Ridgewood Water. The vendor is Miracle Chemical Company. This will be put on a resolution for the February 11, 2015 Public Meeting.
6.) Award Contract – Laboratory Analysis Services – Ridgewood Water
Ms. Sonenfeld stated that this is year two of the contract for laboratory analysis services, and is being awarded to Aqua Pro-Tech Laboratories, who has provided good service in the past. This will be put on a resolution for the February 11, 2015 Public Meeting.
7.) Award Contract – Maintenance of Irrigation Systems/Water Fountains
Ms. Sonenfeld said this a recommendation to award a contract for the irrigation systems and water fountains for 2015 and 2016. The recommendation is not for the lowest bidder, but for the second lowest bidder, who is J & C Irrigation, which has a positive history with the Village. The lowest bidder has no experience and does not have the appropriate licensing to do this work. This will be put on a resolution for the February 11, 2015 Public Meeting.
8.) Award Professional Services Contract – Professional Land Surveyor Services on Retainer
Ms. Sonenfeld commented that this is another annual contract for professional services. This one is for a professional land surveyor and the payment is for an annual retainer in the amount of $1,700, which is the same amount that has been paid for the past seven years. This land surveyor endorses tax maps and provides license coverage for the Village. The fee is fixed, not hourly. This will be put on a resolution for the February 11, 2015 Public Meeting.
9.) Award Extraordinary Unspecifiable Service Contract – Emergency Replacement of Police Department Interview Room Camera and Audio System
Ms. Sonenfeld noted that this is a declaration for an extraordinary award for unspecifiable services, having to do with the Ridgewood Police Department interview room camera and audio system. There was a problem with the system during the last investigation, and the equipment needs to be replaced. The amount of the contract is $18,400, and it is being awarded to Signalscape, Inc. Currently, the system is not in compliance with the New Jersey Attorney General Directives, and this purchase will bring the system into compliance with those directives. This will be put on a resolution for the February 11, 2015 Public Meeting.
c. Policy:
1.) Clinton Avenue and Complete Streets Policy
Ms. Sonenfeld stated that this is a waiver of the complete streets design approach for Clinton Avenue. Councilman Sedon explained that the CSAC made an original recommendation that all of the improvements suggested by the Complete Streets Policy, with the exception of the sidewalks, be implemented. There was no police data available to support the claim that there were accidents on the streets, and the residents in that area do not believe that there is a need for sidewalks, because they have not observed any situation that they felt was unsafe. It seems inappropriate to take taxpayer funds and apply them in a manner in which the residents of that particular area do not wish to use them, and many people involved in this decision pointed out that there are higher priorities in the Village that must be considered.
Councilwoman Knudsen pointed out that, prior to the October Village Council meeting, she had visited Clinton Avenue to familiarize herself with the situation there. She visited the area again in November and December, out of concern for what might be happening in that area, because Councilwoman Knudsen believes there is a safety issue. Councilwoman Knudsen visited the area during school hours, when the street was blocked off, and children were walking up the street and being dropped off along Godwin Avenue. She observed that the children were walking up Clinton Avenue, but there was a significant amount of vehicular activity going on, with cars exiting and entering driveways along the street. There were not too many children walking along the street, but there was quite a bit of traffic, which caused concern to Councilwoman Knudsen. In fact, one car went down the street fairly rapidly. Councilwoman Knudsen returned to visit the area several times when the street was open, and there were no “Do Not Enter” signs. At that time, she observed people walking toward the macadam berm, as they did when the street was blocked off. It seemed as if everyone was looking for a safe place to walk. When Councilwoman Knudsen drove along the street, she observed a young person who seem to be trying to find a safe place to walk, and when two cars passed him at the same time, there was no place for him or anyone else to walk. In another instance, a woman was walking her dog, and she was forced to walk in the middle of the street to get around large piles of leaves. Councilwoman Knudsen commented that while she can appreciate spending with the funds on other projects, she felt it necessary to make the observation that during the times when the street is open and it is dark outside and pedestrians are walking, there is a safety issue. In addition, she has observed that any time people walk along that street, they are looking for safe places to walk, such as the sidewalk. That is why Councilwoman Knudsen said she is unclear about why a Complete Streets project would not consider placing a sidewalk on one side of the street, to allow pedestrians a safe place to walk.
Councilwoman Hauck stated that she supports the recommendation made by the CSAC, and Councilman Pucciarelli agreed. Moreover, Councilman Pucciarelli said he takes Councilwoman Knudsen’s concerns very seriously, but he feels that the people who live on that street see those activities on a daily basis, and he believes they are also concerned about their own safety, as well as that of their children and family members. However, they seem to overwhelmingly favor leaving that street without sidewalks. Councilman Pucciarelli emphasized that he is not supporting the idea of allowing the residents of every street in Ridgewood to make their own decisions in these cases, but they are getting input about the conditions that exist on their own street. There opinions seem to be shared by the members of the CSAC, who have now stated twice that they do not see a need to install sidewalks on that street.
Mayor Aronsohn stated that he also supports the recommendations of the CSAC, which is also supported by the Board of Education and the Homeschools Association.
Councilwoman Knudsen asked Councilman Sedon what the recommendation of the Ridgewood Police Department was. Councilman Sedon answered that Sergeant Pullman was present at both meetings, and he reviewed the data to see if there had been an inordinate number of accidents on that street or any other occurrences of that nature, and they have found nothing. It is also extraordinary that the residents seem to be unanimous in their insistence that sidewalks are not needed on the street. Councilwoman Knudsen said she respects the residents’ opinions and concerns, but she made a different observation about what happens there. Ms. Sonenfeld interjected that Sergeant Pullman, as well as Police Chief John Ward and Mr. Rutishauser, support installing sidewalks on the street. Councilman Sedon added that there seems to be no history of any major accidents occurring on the street, which certainly affects the outcome. Councilwoman Knudsen pointed out that it is not necessarily prudent to base this type of decision on whether there have been any accidents in that area, because accidents can occur at any time.
Mayor Aronsohn asked Ms. Sonenfeld if, as Councilman Sedon mentioned earlier, the issue regarding the sidewalks on Glen Avenue has been explored at this time. Ms. Sonenfeld noted that Glen Avenue is a County road, and she pointed out earlier, because the County does not put in curbs when they pave, the Village is putting in the curbs. At the same time, certain key spots along West Glen Avenue will be getting sidewalks, particularly along the train trestle area. Mayor Aronsohn asked if that is the only place where sidewalks are necessary in that area. Mr. Rutishauser answered that there are several areas along West Glen Avenue that could use sidewalks, but some of them are precluded due to very steep slopes, or particularly on the north side going westbound, there is a drainage ditch in a portion of that area.
This will be put on a resolution for the February 11, 2015 Public Meeting.
2.) Parking Prohibited at All Times on Dead-End Section of Franklin Avenue
Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that this is a proposed revision to a parking ordinance on Franklin Avenue to allow residents to exit their driveways. The CSAC supports this change.
Councilwoman Knudsen commented that the people on the south side of Franklin Avenue told her that they are opposed to a blanket parking prohibition, because there is no parking along North Irving Street, and north of that street, and when they have visitors, parking is very limited for their visitors. Mr. Rutishauser stated that their visitors will still be allowed to park, and this is a change that provides a space for a resident on the north side of Franklin Avenue to be allowed to exit his/her driveway. For cars parked on the north side, getting out of driveways becomes very complicated for those residents. The change only affects that small area of Franklin Avenue, and the rest of the street is unchanged as far as parking is concerned.
This will be put on a resolution for the February 11, 2015 Public Meeting.
d. Operations:
1.) Declare Parks Department Vehicle Surplus Property
Ms. Sonenfeld explained that this will allow this 2000 truck to be listed as surplus property on the Village website. This will be put on a resolution for the February 11, 2015 Public Meeting.
2.) Declare Police Vehicles Surplus Property
Ms. Sonenfeld stated that this is to declare six police vehicles as surplus, so that they can be traded in or auctioned. There was some work done on these vehicles in 2014, and four of them have been replaced by action of the Village Council since that time. Ms. Sonenfeld noted that one of the cars cannot travel above 55 miles per hour due to the fact that it sways back and forth; the engine is running roughly; and there is an exhaust leak. In addition, the ignition is broken, so it is difficult to start the car; and the driver’s seat is broken, and is unable to support someone sitting upright. Another car is in an unreliable condition, with the engine running rough: the suspension is broken, causing difficulty when driving; significant body paint chipping off, exposing the metal and causing rust to form. A third car is in poor shape, and shimmies at high speeds; body paint is chipping off with exposed metal and rust; and has a loud exhaust leak. In addition, the vehicle will stall when stopped. A fourth vehicle has a hole in the driver flood board, making the ground visible; and the battery system has never been serviced or replaced (it is a hybrid vehicle). These are just a few examples of the problems with the six cars. Ms. Sonenfeld enumerated these problems to emphasize the fact that the fleet needs to be reviewed, and there will be a separate capital presentation on February 28th to discuss the fleet. Councilman Pucciarelli noted that the Councilmembers always seem to have the idea that it was a good thing to keep vehicles for a long time, but they failed to consider the maintenance costs and the burden on the maintenance staff to keep the vehicles running. This will be put on a resolution for the February 11, 2015 Public Meeting.
3.) Shared Services Agreement with Ho-Ho-Kus – Providing Sanitary Sewer Services to 248 Franklin Turnpike, Ridgewood
Ms. Sonenfeld noted that this will authorize her and Mayor Aronsohn to execute an interlocal agreement for providing sanitary sewer service through the Borough of Ho-Ho-Kus to the property at 248 Franklin Turnpike. The property is predominantly in Ridgewood, but the sewer service is hooked up through Ho-Ho-Kus. The Village will be billed annually for the sewer service, which will be included in the property taxes. It is approximately $500 per year. Mr. Rutishauser has ensured that all expenses borne by the Village are covered. This will be put on a resolution for the February 11, 2015 Public Meeting.
4.) Shared Services Agreement with Glen Rock – Child Health Clinic
Ms. Sonenfeld explained that this is the Shared Services agreements for the clinic held in Glen Rock, not for the doctor’s services. This will be put on a resolution for the February 11, 2015 Public Meeting.
4. MANAGER’S REPORT
Ms. Sonenfeld started her report by discussing the recent storms. On Sunday, January 18th, the ice storm started early in the morning. Ms. Sonenfeld alerted the various Village emergency services personnel. She stated that Village staff were very zealous in their attempts to get to residents. That means that some residents probably got more phone calls them they should have, but every method available was used to alert everyone. There are also some issues with the databases between the County and Ridgewood, but every possible database was used. Some residents complained that they were called too many times. However, Ms. Sonenfeld said that the good thing that happened as a result of this was that due to all of the methods used to disseminate the information, Ridgewood had fewer accidents than any neighboring community. Communication was definitely the key in keeping things calm.
Regarding the “blizzard” of 2015, Ms. Sonenfeld was very impressed with the emergency services team. A lot of preparation and planning went into storm management, including a number of meetings with everyone involved. Jeremy Kleiman, Director of the Office of Emergency Management, did a fantastic job of pulling everyone together from the various disciplines. Pre-treating of streets started two days before the storm, and the emergency crew was available around the clock, which will have an impact on some of the expenses. The crews were either treating the roads, snowplowing, and scraping. Due to the warnings from the National Weather Service (NWS), no one was sent home, and people were working through the 20 hours of the storm based on the forecasts received. No trees fell down, and there were no power lines down. There were also no accidents reported. Some of the credit for having no accidents must be given Governor Christie, who imposed a travel ban. A travel ban within Ridgewood was also imposed.
After the two storms, Ms. Sonenfeld stated that she is very impressed with the level of expertise and professionalism of the Village staff. The results showed in the quality of the streets.
The recent storms cost the Village approximately $105,000, including overtime, salt, brine, trucks, and the contractors. One storm usually costs the village approximately $50,000-$75,000. One of the issues that has never been addressed before is the issue of the snow around the parking meters in Ridgewood. Passenger-side doors cannot be opened due to the snow that has piled up, or passengers must step out into several feet of snow if they can get their doors open. A cost projection has been prepared to get the snow removed from around the meters, and that will take place tomorrow night from 11:00 P.M.-7:00 A.M. to prepare for the expected storm on Saturday. It is expected to cost approximately $5,000. There is another meeting scheduled for tomorrow, because a second storm has been forecast, and a determination has to be made about whether it would be more prudent to wait and clear the meters after the second storm.
The leaf removal procedure was evaluated, with discussions on what went well and what went wrong, and ideas going forward. Approximately 35,217 cubic yards of leaves were collected in 2014, which is a little bit less than last year. It was felt that having the sweepers go behind the loaders worked well, and left the streets cleaner. In addition, employee attendance was better. Additional time was spent in each area due to the presence of outside contractors. Rakers were able to leave the curb lines cleaner, and fewer complaints were received than ever before. On the other hand, some things did go wrong. There were significant equipment breakdowns, mainly in the leaf vacuums. Replacements of that equipment are included in the 2015 capital budget. The tub grinder at the Lakeview Recycling Center is not running well. The schedule will be tightened for 2015 to avoid confusion. Another problem that was encountered was the number of cars parked on top of leaves, as well as non-compliance issues due to residents who did not pay attention to the schedule.
Going forward, Ms. Sonenfeld plans to enforce compliance next year. She received many emails from residents that their neighbors were not complying, and that the streets were clear, but some residents put their leaves out after the streets had already been cleared. Summonses will be issued next year. Landscapers will be consulted, and equipment ideas will be solicited. In addition, a contractor will have to be found for next year. The recommendation will be made to the Village Council at the February 28th budget meeting.
Regarding the e-ticket update, a test submission was made to the Administrative Officer of the Courts. Two tickets were issued, one of which was a moving violation, and the other was a parking violation. Another test will be performed next week, and two weeks after that, it is hoped that implementation can begin sometime between March 1st and March 15th.
Village services after the storms have resumed, and Ms. Sonenfeld encouraged everyone who has not yet signed up for e-notices to do so. Garbage pickup will resume, and residents are asked to bring their trash cans to the curb. Bulk pickup was canceled for today for the east side, and due to the upcoming holidays, an additional pickup on the east side has been scheduled for February 4th. There are two more days left for Christmas tree pickup: tomorrow and Thursday for the west side; and Friday for the east side. After that time, there will be no more Christmas tree pickups, so residents will have to bring their trees to the recycling center.
In her “Response to Residents,” Ms. Sonenfeld said the next “Meet the Manager” session will be on Tuesday, February 24th, from 5:00 P.M.-7:30 P.M. Tomorrow, Ms. Sonenfeld and Mr. Rutishauser will be visiting with residents to investigate various areas throughout the Village.
Upcoming events include the CBD parking forum, with the date and location to be determined. First-quarter taxes are due on February 1st. Ridgewood Jamboree Days will be on February 4th-7th at Benjamin Franklin Middle School. The annual Chamber of Commerce Restaurant Week, with discounted menus, ends tomorrow.
5. COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilwoman Knudsen reminded everyone that they could purchase tickets to the Ridgewood Jamboree Days at rhsjamboree.org.
Planning Board – Councilwoman Knudsen stated that the Planning Board met on January 20th, and the only application to be heard was the Church of God application. The meeting was adjourned and carried over to March 3rd. There will be no further delays on that particular application. The next regular Planning Board meeting will be on January 29th at 7:30 P.M. at the Ridgewood High School Student Center. This meeting is an important one, because it is a continuation of the public hearing land use plan element to the Master Plan. There will be an opportunity for public comment, and Councilwoman Knudsen encouraged everyone to attend.
For the benefit of residents who were interested in the INL application in Paramus, Councilwoman Knudsen said she attended the Paramus Board of Adjustment meeting on January 22nd to hear that particular application. Some Ridgewood residents have an interest in that outcome, because it concerns the property at the corner of Paramus Road and Linwood Avenue, involving a senior day care facility. The continuation of that hearing is scheduled for 7:30 P.M. on Thursday, March 26th, at the Paramus Borough Hall.
Fourth of July Committee – Councilwoman Knudsen noted that the Fourth of July Committee will meet again on Monday, February 9th, at 7:30 P.M., at the Ridgewood Firehouse. She invited anyone who is interested in volunteering their time, effort, and energy to come.
Public Library Board of Trustees– Councilman Pucciarelli stated that the Public Library Board of Trustees were to have met last Thursday, but due to a lack of a quorum, they will instead meet tomorrow.
The next CBD forum will be held on Wednesday, March 18th. The scheduled topics are parking and Blue Laws.
Community Center Advisory Board – Councilwoman Hauck said that the Community Center Advisory Board met on January 17th. In April 2014, they formed a foundation arm. Part of their goal is to create the articles of incorporation and bylaws, as well as the Board of Directors, all of which have now been voted on. The Community Center Advisory Board now has a tax identification number and a bank account, and they will be applying for status as a 501(c)3 entity for tax-exempt status. They also discussed long-term planning for the Community Center, including facility upgrades and programming, as well as fundraising ideas and another initiative to be implemented with respect to a needs assessment survey for senior services in Ridgewood. This will help the committee to better prioritize where funds will be allocated as they move forward.
There was also a disability roundtable held on January 20th, in which they had a dialogue about good citizenship and why people should ask themselves how their behavior affects others as well as themselves.
Councilwoman Hauck also mentioned a photography project she spearheaded in October 2014, and the due date for the pictures was supposed to be December 21, 2014. However, the deadline has been extended until the spring, possibly May 21st 2015. So far, approximately 13 photographers have each sent an average of 20 pictures. The focus of the project is to highlight the lifestyles of senior citizens in Ridgewood, with candid photographs taken by amateurs or professionals. The photographs will be put into a book, and perhaps a slideshow. She encouraged anyone who is interested to participate. Photographs can be submitted to Councilwoman Hauck at ghauck@ridgewoodnj.net, or they can be given to Janet Fricke, or to Wholesale Photo.
Citizens Safety Advisory Committee (CSAC)– Councilman Sedon stated that the members of the Citizens Safety Advisory Committee discussed the issues on Clinton Avenue, which have already been discussed. He also noted that a resident came to a meeting in December 2014 asking why residents could not go around filming violations in the Village and turn them into the Police Department. Sergeant Pullman explained that residents can submit violations to the Police Department. They must have some sort of evidence, either photographic or video, of the violation. The evidence must include the make and model of the vehicle, if it is a vehicular violation, as well as the license plate number; a description of the driver; and after the evidence is submitted, the person reporting the violation must be willing to testify in court about the circumstances.
Mayor Aronsohn commented on the recent storms that were mentioned by Ms. Sonenfeld. As Ms. Sonenfeld mentioned, the number of accidents in Ridgewood after the black ice storm was fewer than those in other towns, and they stopped after the communications went out. Mayor Aronsohn believes that is a testament to everyone jumping into action so quickly, and recognizing the severity of the problem.
With respect to the “blizzard,” Mayor Aronsohn is glad that the predictions were wrong, but the Village emergency services personnel were well-prepared. Everyone worked together so that everything flowed as smoothly as possible, and most important thing was that everyone was safe.
Planning Board – Mayor Aronsohn said that the meeting tomorrow night, as mentioned by Councilwoman Knudsen, is very important. The public will have a chance to speak out on this issue regarding multi-family housing. However, there might be a problem, because there is also a basketball game scheduled at Ridgewood High School at the same time. That means that parking could be an issue.
Councilwoman Hauck discussed the disability roundtable meeting, and Mayor Aronsohn noted that a good cross-section of the community attended the meeting. There will be more of these types of discussions to keep the conversation moving.
The annual Martin Luther King, Jr., celebrations were held in honor of Dr. King’s birthday. Mayor Aronsohn commended everyone who participated, and it was a wonderful opportunity for the community to come together.
Mayor Aronsohn acknowledged Laura Herzog of the Ridgewood News, who was attending her final Village Council meeting. He thanked her for everything she has done, and wished her luck in her future endeavors.
6. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC
Mayor Aronsohn stated that they would again have comments from the public and asked anyone wishing to address the Village Council to come forward.
Brian Fowler, 57 Clinton Avenue, said he is an attorney who has lived and practice law in Ridgewood for more than 20 years. Mr. Fowler stated that he was not aware that a need for a waiver in the Complete Streets policy to forgo the installation of sidewalks on Clinton Avenue. After doing some research on the issue, Mr. Fowler stated that he found that Ridgewood adopted a resolution to apply the Complete Streets policy to that area in 2011, but Mr. Fowler was not advised what was involved in that. He could not find anything stating that the policy requires sidewalks any time road construction is undertaken. The policy does say that pedestrians should be given due consideration in any of those projects. Mr. Fowler knew that when Ridgewood adopted the plan in 2011, it emanated from the NJDOT. He examined some of the materials from NJDOT on Complete Streets, and he noticed that it said that adopting a Complete Streets policy does not mean that every street in every community should have sidewalks, bike lanes, and transit. There is no universal prescriptive design, but design is driven by local context and demand.
Mr. Fowler also noticed that there is quite a bit of information and material available regarding Complete Streets on the NJDOT website, some of which discussed specific situations in which there should be exemptions or they should not apply, and Mr. Fowler believes some of those could be applicable to Clinton Avenue. For example, it mentioned that when there are existing user restrictions, that fact should be considered by a Council in determining whether Complete Streets should be applied to a particular street. In this case, there is a user restriction in which vehicles are restricted most of the week during most of the day, and during the most-traveled portion of the day. It also discusses whether there is an actual need, and whether a determination was made as to whether there was any current safety condition requiring or calling for inclusion of certain aspects of Complete Streets on each project. Testimony given at the CSAC meeting indicated that there was no actual evidence presented at any time that any safety issue has arisen that requires implementation of the sidewalk at this time as part of this project.
Mr. Fowler noticed that the resolution adopted by the Village Council said that Complete Streets should be considered insofar as practicable. Mr. Fowler does not believe that the Complete Streets policy was intended to supplant or abrogate other ordinances that already exist. He noted that the authority for the Village Council to require sidewalks derives from Section 249-25, which states when the Village Council can require sidewalks. Specifically, it says that sidewalks shall be required to be installed and constructed when the Council determines that the health, safety, and welfare requires it. Mr. Fowler commented that at the CSAC meetings, as well as earlier this evening, Councilman Sedon referenced Chief Ward’s assertion that sidewalks are always safer. It makes sense that sidewalks would be considered safer, but Mr. Fowler does not see how that could be construed as “adequate need” under the ordinance from which the Village Council derives its authority. If that were true, there would be no need for the ordinance. The ordinance states that the Village Council must determine that safety requires sidewalks, but if sidewalks are always required for safety, then the Village Council always has the authority to order sidewalks. Mr. Fowler believes the authority deriving from the ordinance in question anticipates that something has to be presented that shows an imminent safety concern that requires the implementation of sidewalks, and he does not believe that was ever shown.
Mr. Fowler noted the observations made by Councilwoman Knudsen, and he commended her for taking the time on several occasions to make those observations for herself. However, he noted that her observations are contrary to his own, and he has lived on that street for 16 years. He has never seen a situation such as that described by Councilwoman Knudsen. In fact, he has observed the exact opposite. On any given Saturday morning, there are many people walking up and down Clinton Avenue, walking their dogs or riding their bikes, or pedestrians. Many people go out of their way to come to Clinton Avenue because they say they enjoy it, and it is very pleasant to walk up and down that street. That indicates to Mr. Fowler that people are not concerned about their own safety on Clinton Avenue, and that there is a much greater sample size of people who are actually pedestrians on that street, making the safety record that much more impressive.
Ron Guzas, 51 Clinton Avenue, said he and his wife have lived on that street for about six years. Dr. Guzas said it was difficult to listen to Councilwoman Knudsen’s comments about the children walking down Clinton Avenue, because he believes her observations are inaccurate. Dr. Guzas, as a physician, frequently works shifts, including nights, and he frequently has days off. He has observed the children walking up and down the street, and he sees that they usually walk up and down the middle of the street. Dr. Guzas believes that the children may have noticed Councilwoman Knudsen on the street, and behaved differently because of that. As a representative of the CSAC, Dr. Guzas has asked the Councilmembers to leave their street alone. There are consequences to installing sidewalks, and the consequences to him would be financially devastating, because he recently spent approximately $50,000 improving the front of his house. In addition, he would no longer be able to accommodate two cars in his driveway. Councilwoman Knudsen responded by saying that she took photos on every occasion in which she visited the street, so that she could document the pedestrian traffic going both ways at different times of the day.
Greg McCallister, 75 Clinton Avenue, stated that he has two young boys who attend school right up the street, and his sons have many friends who also attend that school. Between 8:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M., Mr. McCallister described a “parade of children” going along Clinton Avenue in both directions. He finds the notion that the street is unsafe a ridiculous one. Children walk along the street, and others are dropped off. Many mothers accompany their children when they walk to and from school, and he cannot understand how the street could be considered unsafe.
Elaine Diverblis, 41 Clinton Avenue, commented that she has lived on the street for a year and a half, and she has a daughter who walks to school every day. In fact, Ms. Libenson stated that one of the reasons they purchased their home there was due to the fact that it is a wide open street during school days, and children could walk to and from school every day, with the street closed to traffic. She and her husband have never observed any safety issues, with one exception. Ms. Libenson noted that garbage collection is sometimes a problem, and she suggested that if a way could be found to do garbage collection first thing in the morning on that street, it would be appreciated.
Anne Loving, 342 South Irving Street, stated that she signed a complaint against another Ridgewood citizen, when she, her husband, and their two dogs were nearly killed on the corner of Franklin Avenue and Maple Avenue several years ago by a driver who was talking on a cell phone. She testified in court against the driver, who faced repercussions for that action. Ms. Loving noted that she did not have photographs of the incident, but could only provide oral testimony about it.
Although she does not live on Clinton Avenue, Ms. Loving stated that she agrees with two of the Councilmembers. She noted that if the Chief of Police, Sergeant Pullman, and Mr. Rutishauser are all indicating that having sidewalks is safer, their opinion should not be dismissed. Ms. Loving said she is not sure about the credentials of the Homeschool Association and the Board of Education to make determinations about such safety issues, and the homeowners have a personal stake in it, because they face losing some of their property if sidewalks are installed, as well as the fact that having sidewalks will affect the appearance of those properties. Ms. Loving noted that Councilwoman Knudsen stated that a lack of history of incidents in that area is not a compelling reason to forgo installing sidewalks, and Ms. Loving agrees with that opinion. Ms. Loving also agreed with Councilman Pucciarelli when he stated that individual homeowners should not be able to decide whether a street has sidewalks. Ms. Loving said she never would believe that it is safer to allow children to walk in the street.
Boyd Loving, 342 South Irving Street, thanked Councilman Pucciarelli for supporting senior citizens and their technology skills.
Next, Mr. Loving asked about the payments from Mr. Rico, and if they are being received on time. Ms. Sonenfeld answered that they are.
Mr. Loving noted that there was also a $5,000 allocation associated with a survey at the Friends on Highwood, and he asked if that is moving forward. Ms. Sonenfeld answered that the survey has not yet occurred, and they are waiting for those results.
Kim Guzas, 51 Clinton Avenue, stated that she is a runner, and she runs throughout Ridgewood. In some areas, there are sidewalks that Ms. Guzas finds unsafe for her to use, and she has to run in the street because the sidewalks are in such disrepair.
Paul Genova, 30 Clinton Avenue, has lived there for 27 years. All three of his children went to school in Ridgewood, and they walked to and from school with no problems. Mr. Genova stated that he has never encountered a problem when walking his dog and that area, nor did his children when they walked to and from school. Mr. Genova is concerned that if sidewalks are installed, it might create a safety hazard because at some point, someone might want to open up the street, and people will start parking along Clinton Avenue, and the street is not wide enough to accommodate all of that.
Bob Fuhrman, 49 Clinton Avenue, stated that resolution 11-135 was passed on June 8, 2011, and South Murray Street was repaved in 2012, and no sidewalks were included. That indicates that sidewalks are not mandatory, and Clinton Avenue is much safer than South Murray Street due to the traffic restrictions. The residents along the street look out for the children, and they are conscious of the fact that children move through there on a regular basis.
Mr. Fuhrman also commended the Building Department for the proposed technology project. He noted that he is a “victim” of the process, because he applied for a permit in October 2014, and his contractor was recently told that the permit application was misplaced. Mr. Fuhrman waited approximately 45 minutes while a staff member manually search through stacks of paperwork, after which time Mr. Fuhrman was told that the permit application was in the wrong stack. It has now been signed, and the contractor has the permit. Computerizing the Building Department would help to eliminate these types of problems.
There were no other comments from the public at this time, and Mayor Aronsohn closed the time for public comments.
9. RESOLUTION TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION
The following resolution, numbered 15-25, to go into Closed Session, was read in full by the Deputy Village Clerk, as follows:
8. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Village Council, on a motion by Mayor Aronsohn, seconded by Councilman Pucciarelli, and carried unanimously by voice vote, the meeting was adjourned at 10:11 P.M.
PAUL S. ARONSOHN, Mayor
DONNA M. JACKSON, Deputy Village Clerk
