laura a. carucci, c.s.r., r.p.r., l.l.c. -...

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

LAURA A. CARUCCI, C.S.R., R.P.R., L.L.C.201-641-1812

1

VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOODMAYOR & COUNCIL

MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 2011COMMENCING AT 7:00 P.M.

..............................IN THE MATTER OF : TRANSCRIPT OFPROPOSED VALLEY HOSPITAL : PROCEEDINGSEXPANSION PUBLIC HEARING :..............................

B E F O R E:

VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD MAYOR & COUNCILTHERE BEING PRESENT:

KEITH D. KILLION, MAYOR

THOMAS M. RICHE, DEPUTY MAYOR

PAUL ARONSOHN, COUNCILMAN

BERNADETTE WALSH, COUNCILWOMAN

LAURA A. CARUCCI, C.S.R., R.P.R., L.L.C.CERTIFIED COURT REPORTERS

P.O. BOX 505SADDLE BROOK, NJ 07663

201-641-1812201-843-0515 [email protected]

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


2

A L S O P R E S E N T:

DR. KENNETH GABBERT, VILLAGE MANAGER

HEATHER MAILANDER, VILLAGE CLERK

A P P E A R A N C E S:

PRICE MEESE SHULMAN & D'ARMINIO, P.C.BY: MATTHEW ROGERS, ESQ.50 Tice BoulevardWoodcliff Lake, New Jersey 07677Counsel for the Mayor & Council

LAURA A. CARUCCI, C.S.R., R.P.R., L.L.C.CERTIFIED COURT REPORTERS

P.O. BOX 505SADDLE BROOK, NJ 07663

201-641-1812201-843-0515 [email protected]

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


3

I N D E X

S P E A K E R S: PAGE

JOSEPH STAIGAR , P.E. 8

JOHN J. LAMB, ESQ. 89

ROBIN GOLDFISCHER, ESQ. 93

GENE CORNELL 98623 Belmont Road

JANET TUOMEY 10059 John Street

CATHY BENSON 105570 Fairway Road

ZIGI PUTNINS 108572 Fairway Road

LISA KENDER 111334 Fairway Road

DAVID LIPSON 114302 Heights Road

TOM KOSSOFF 11746 Heermance Place

LAWRENCE KELTY 120438 Colonial Road

LEE WARREN 122140 Washington Place

GWEN HAUTK 127217 Fairmount Road

EXHIBITS

NUMBER DESCRIPTION IDENT./EVID.

(NO EXHIBITS MARKED)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


4

MAYOR KILLION: Call to order,

statement of compliance. Adequate notice of this

meeting has been provided by a posting on the

bulletin board, Village Hall, by mail to The

Ridgewood News, The Record, and by submission to all

persons entitled to the same as provided by law of

the schedule including the time and date of this

meeting.

Will you please all rise and join me in

the flag salute?

The flag is located right there

(indicating).

(Whereupon, all rise for a recitation

of the Pledge of Allegiance.)

MAYOR KILLION: Heather, could I have a

roll call, please?

MS. MAILANDER: Councilman Aronsohn?

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: Here.

MS. MAILANDER: Councilman Riche?

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: Here.

MS. MAILANDER: Councilwoman Walsh?

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Here.

MS. MAILANDER: Councilman Wellinghorst

is absent.

MAYOR KILLION: Right, Councilman

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


5

Wellinghorst is out of town on business tonight.

He's going to watch the meeting live on his computer.

MS. MAILANDER: Okay. We're going to

have a brief overview. The meeting starts at 7:00.

It will end promptly at 10:00. We have public

comment which is three minutes, please -- at one

time, one bite at the apple, as my predecessor used

to say, so you can only speak once.

There is a sign-up sheet -- for those

who came late, there's a sign-up sheet for those who

wish to speak. The Clerk will call your name.

Please turn off all cell phones or at

least silence them. Please refrain from clapping,

applause, boos or yelling out. You certainly may

display signs under the First Amendment, but do not

hang them on the wall or destroy the walls.

Before we start, I have a brief

statement to read.

I would like to advise the public that

through its attorney, the Council received last

Friday a letter from Charles Collins, Counsel for

Valley Hospital, making reference to an article that

appeared in The Record on Tuesday, September 13th.

In his letter, Mr. Collins intimidated

that there is a preconception that the Council has

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


6

predetermined its position regarding the proposed

amendments in the Master Plan, as it pertains to the

Hospital Zone. Nothing could be farther from the

truth.

The Council has taken great pains to

make sure the process utilized in its review of the

testimony and exhibits before the Planning Board is

fair and open. And its decision to open the meetings

for comments from the public provide any party with

the opportunity to make its position and reasoning

known to the Council.

Throughout the long and contemptuous

process taken up by this matter since 2006, the

elected officials of the Village have refrained from

committing an official opinion as members of the

Council on this issue. We will continue to proceed

in this manner until we conclude our process and will

not be influenced by alleged perceptions, whether it

be written or press, discussed at a meeting or

communicated in writing, written correspondence.

Also I'd like to say that it's

fundamental in the American system of democracy that

as a candidate for elected office you are able to

express your views on issues you may need to address,

if elected, to advise the voters of your reasoning

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


7

and opinion on specific matter and then, if elected,

participate in legislation or decision process on the

same issue discussed during campaign.

I have been advised that there are

court decisions, both state and federal, backing this

up.

Is the traffic expert here?

MS. MAILANDER: I don't believe he is

here yet, no.

MR. LAMB: He just got here.

MS. MAILANDER: Oh, did he? Okay.

Good.

MR. LAMB: No? Sorry.

MAYOR KILLION: Right now we're going

to hear a summary of traffic issues presented by

Joseph Staigar P.E., P.P., of Staigar Engineering

Limited.

Mr. Staigar.

MR. LAMB: He's not here.

MAYOR KILLION: He's not here.

Somebody told me he was here.

MR. LAMB: I thought he was here.

MAYOR KILLION: Okay. Until he gets

here, right now we're going to entertain comment from

attorneys on both sides.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


8

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: He's here.

MAYOR KILLION: Sorry, attorneys, he

showed up.

MS. MAILANDER: That's a good thing.

MAYOR KILLION: Yes.

Come on right up.

I would also like to apologize, we're

so far back it's --

MR. ROGERS: Joe, the podium.

MAYOR KILLION: The podium. I'm sorry.

The podium. Yes.

We're so far back, but as people were

watching last time, there was a lot of feedback.

So, it was planned that we move us back

from the speakers. It's not that we're trying to

hide.

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: Not yet, at

least.

MAYOR KILLION: Not yet, yes. Thank

you, Councilman Aronsohn.

MR. STAIGAR: Do you want me here?

MAYOR KILLION: Sir, would you please

address the Council?

MR. STAIGAR: Yes.

MAYOR KILLION: For the record your

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


9

name?

MR. STAIGAR: My name is Joseph

Staigar.

Just bear with me one second.

MAYOR KILLION: Sure.

MR. STAIGAR: Okay.

Yes, I was the traffic consultant for

the Planning Board in the proceedings of the -- for

the Hospital.

MAYOR KILLION: Mr. Staigar, could you

give this Council a brief summary of --

MR. STAIGAR: Who I am, and what do I

do?

MAYOR KILLION: And also, basically,

what you told the Planning Board.

MR. STAIGAR: Sure.

I am a professional engineer licensed

in the State of New Jersey. And I've been practicing

as a traffic engineer throughout the State of New

Jersey as well as throughout the northeast.

Traffic engineers, in addition to

designing roads and highways, we analyze traffic

systems. We project how much traffic future

development will generate, what will happen when that

additional traffic is superimposed on roadway

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


10

networks and analyze what may need to be done to

mitigate any impacts. And that's essentially what

was involved with that.

Over the course of many months, I

reviewed and performed my own -- reviewed a number of

documents, traffic analyses that were prepared by

Bertin Engineering, who were the traffic consultants

for -- for the Hospital, but also made my own

independent analyses, made my own traffic counts,

field measurements and my own capacity analyses as

well.

To capsulate what transpired and what

were the results of the many months of review, I did

prepare a -- a May 3rd, 2010 letter to the Planning

Board, which provided a summary of what the findings

were. And, maybe, if I can just run through those,

that may help the Board, and I'm sure the Council, of

what my results were.

The one thing that we did find that

there was some discrepancy and some concern of how

trip generation, how much traffic the proposal or the

so-called expansion of the Hospital would

incorporate.

The Hospital's contention was we're

ten-pounds in a five-pound bag and all we really want

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


11

to do is expand to be what a typical hospital is of

today. And a lot of that made sense to me. Their

expansion was related to having single rooms, private

rooms, so to speak. The equipment that's needed, the

diagnostic equipment that's needed at the Hospital is

immense to what it was in the past years.

So, certainly, there is a -- a need for

more floor area then -- then -- of today's hospital

then of yesterdays, only from that basis.

Their contention was that we were not

going to increase traffic at all, all we're doing is

trying to take that hospital and -- and take the same

amount of services for the people and -- and put it

in a -- in a bigger -- bigger floor area.

What I did was, we studied -- we sat at

the driveways of the existing hospital and counted

cars in and out, to determine what were the traffic

characteristics of the existing hospital. And we

did, indeed, find that the amount of traffic that's

generated today by Valley Hospital is very much

higher in intensity than it is for the typical

hospital elsewhere. We had trip generation rates of

how much traffic a hospital should generate. And we

found that Valley Hospital did generate far more

traffic than what the typical hospital was, which

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


12

kind of gave credence or believability credible -- to

be credible that the Hospital is jam packed in a

smaller floor area than what they need.

We went further and found deficiencies

in the traffic flow in the area.

And we keyed in particularly at the

intersection of Linwood Avenue and Van Dien Avenue,

that intersection backs up extensively in a northerly

direction, the queuing.

That northerly queuing interferes with

the Hospital driveways. It's gridlocked at times.

And what we saw was walking down the street from the

school, Benjamin Franklin School, is a high volume of

school children from that middle school. And many

times that they cross the site driveway, they're

walking in between cars.

There are crossing guards at each and

every one of those driveways, but because of the

gridlock they're walking, so -- through stacked cars.

So, we had concerns, safety concerns,

particularly for the school children going to and

from the school.

The end result of finally what we

agreed with the Hospital was to make improvements to

the Van Dien and Linwood Avenue intersection by

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


13

adding additional lanes, particularly left turn lane

in the southbound Van Dien Avenue approach and a

right turn lane for the westbound Linwood Avenue.

That's the traffic if the Hospital is sitting on one

of the corners, the traffic flow would be the right

turn from Linwood onto Van Dien across the Hospital

frontage and then the left turn southbound onto

Linwood Avenue would be the reverse flow of that

right turn. That's the majority of traffic flow.

And those are the volumes -- those are

the heaviest volumes in the area. The Hospital is

probably the major, if not the most -- well, probably

the most significant trip generator through that

intersection and to the area.

So, that's reflected by the -- those

two turning movements.

So, by improving that intersection, by

adding lanes, it improves the existing conditions

extensively. That queuing that you see in a

northerly direction from the intersection of Linwood

and Van Dien would be virtually eliminated, the

extensive queuing so that it would not back up into

the driveways. There would be improvements to the

intersection signalization as well, to make it run

more efficiently.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


14

So, the compound effect of increased

lanes as well as improved efficiency to the traffic

signal system, would improve the capacity of that

intersection extensively, as I said, to virtually

eliminate -- I'm not going to say it's going to

absolutely clean it up and make it so it's no

backups, but certainly not to -- no where near the

extent that it backs up now across the Hospital

driveways and up towards the middle school.

That was one of the major improvements

that they were going to be made. And my

recommendation was that those major improvements be

done at the very early stages of construction. One

of the first things that should be done before the

main campus is -- is -- is constructed, so that that

traffic can flow, can be improved and that safety can

be enhanced as well.

So that should be -- that -- my

recommendation was those improvements should be made

at the very early stages of the construction

commencement.

We also looked at the intersection of

North Van Dien Avenue and Red Birch Court/East Glen

Avenue. It's got two names to it. It's unsignalized

at that intersection.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


15

I think the police department as well

as -- yes, the police department primarily found that

they weren't quite sure what to do at that

intersection. And the answer might be to signalize

it, but I'm not sure that the signal warrants are met

at that intersection. But, again, that -- that

should be studied further in concert with the police

department.

We looked at a couple of things there,

a four-way stop as well, at that intersection. But,

again, that was something that it's a possibility,

but it may not be a appropriate for that

intersection. I'm not quite sure what needs to be

done as that intersection, if it operates at level --

we call Level of Service F, now, "F" as in "Frank".

Signalization may be an answer, but it doesn't seem

like the absolute answer. And it's an existing

condition. But, again, I think that needs further

study.

Signal operation -- number three,

another improvement would be signal operation

coordination of the Linwood Avenue intersections with

Van Dien and North Pleasant Avenue. And what we

found was another difficult spot was the Linwood

Avenue driveway of the Hospital with John Street,

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


16

that intersection. Also Linwood Avenue -- Linwood

Avenue operated fairly well at that unsignalized

intersection. It was the Hospital driveway that

backed up extensively. And if these two signals at

Van Dien and at Mount Pleasant (sic) were

coordinated, the timing was coordinated -- North

Pleasant Avenue, the timing was coordinated, that

could reduce artifical gaps in traffic to allow

better maneuvers out of the Hospital driveway.

We're still not -- I'm still not

entirely convinced that that coordination of signals

will significantly reduce the queueing and backups

that we'll see in the Hospital driveway at Linwood

Avenue and that a police officer or traffic control

at that site driveway -- particularly during the

shift change, the afternoon shift change between 2:30

and 3:30 p.m. that implementation of police traffic

control can be decided post-construction, and when

the Hospital, the new hospital is in full operation,

and could be at the discretion of the police

department, whether they feel they need that or not.

Internal improvements would be a no

left turn at the Kurth Cottage driveway immediately

after motorists enter the driveway, because there's

such a short stack as you enter off of Van Dien

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


17

Street and if you try to make an immediate left, you

may be blocked by vehicles trying to exit out of that

driveway.

So someone sitting there and trying to

make that immediate left into the parking lot may

cause a backup onto Van Dien.

John Street would be a right turn exit

only for eastbound traffic, continue on the eastbound

traffic on Linwood Avenue.

Improve traffic and pedestrian safety

along the frontage roads of the Hospital to include

improved signage, crosswalks, other traffic control

and calming devices. Reevaluate and improve the

wayfarer sign. Now the wayfarer, W-a-y-f-a-r-e-r, is

the blue signs. You see the blue signs were the "H"

on it, you know, so that you know that the Hospital

is straight or make a left or make a right.

We want to make sure that people that

are trying to get to the Hospital are not circulating

around -- around the neighborhoods and making K-turns

in people's driveways and such.

So that should be improved, not only

within the Borough of Ridgewood, I think it should be

a concern and effort with abutting municipalities as

well.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


18

Parking management plan, this is going

to be a very large project. There's going to be a

lot of construction workers. There's going to be the

need for storage for construction equipment. There

is -- there was a parking management plan whereby the

staff of the Hospital would not park on-site, that

the parking for the remaining parking space would be

for visitors and doctors and then may be certain

personnel. But the majority of -- of staff people

would be parked off-site, undetermined locations at

this point, but they would you be shuttled back and

forth. As that's how the loss of parking during the

construction phase would be -- would be handled.

I think the Borough needs to see a

phased parking management plan as the construction --

well, before the construction starts, as well as

during the construction process.

And then -- and then a -- what was kind

of lacking in the traffic report was a -- a -- a

parking management plan as well.

I observed the way that the parking is

accommodated now. There's allocation for doctors,

for staff and for visitors. And there seems to be

certain areas of the parking lot that are over-parked

because people double parking and parking where they

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


19

shouldn't be parking. And there's other areas of the

existing parking that there's empty spaces.

So, a post-construction parking

management plan needs to be prepared and implemented.

And that plan, it's not -- we're not going to come up

with absolute final answer on day one. It's going to

have to be a plan, a work in progress, because the

Hospital is going to have to adjust the parking

allocations, where the doctors park, where the staff

parks, where the -- where the visitors park as well,

to find -- to find, eventually, a balance of how to

allocate that parking. Parking is very tight on the

existing site. There is a -- the proposal is to

expand it in the order of five or 10 percent, which

should be about the minimum amount that would be

needed for expansion.

So that parking management plan would

identify if there's any need for additional parking

as well.

And I think a key aspect was the

parking garages, particularly the one at Linwood

Avenue, closest to Linwood Avenue, was originally

designed to be -- have levels that were not

interconnected and I did not like that because it

bought an overburden of traffic to one location,

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


20

exiting particularly exiting at Linwood Avenue, but

if they were interconnected with one another, then I

think people would certainly find a balance between,

"well, you know, the last time I used Linwood Avenue.

I was waiting in line with 20 other people, let me go

try Van Dien, and that may be a lot easier".

So, to have an interconnection of the

parking decks would be more efficient and reduce

congestion, queuing and driver frustration.

And, lastly, the easterly side of the

Hospital is going to be the location where the truck

traffic would be, deliveries would occur. And we

have quite a few residents -- residential properties

with their rear yards that butt up against the

Hospital and to provide a sound and a visual barrier

to separate that -- those deliveries and that truck

activity, particularly, from those residents, to

protect those residents as well.

Those are the -- there was -- it was 12

points, and those are my 12 points.

MAYOR KILLION: Okay. Thank you, very

much.

MR. STAIGAR: You're welcome.

MAYOR KILLION: We're now going to open

it up to questions or comments by the Council

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


21

Members.

With the Council's permission, I'll

lead off on this one.

I have a few questions. In my past

life I was a police officer in this town for

30 years, so I find reading these notes very

interesting or the -- not the notes, but the Planning

Board testimony. And I do have some practical

knowledge of the situation.

I'm going to start off on the Planning

Board meeting of May 6th, 2008, page 85, line 11, you

stated that you did your own spot checks on peak

times.

How many of these spot checks did you

do? And what were the times?

MR. STAIGAR: Oh, I -- I did them on a

-- only once, meaning that if I -- I went out several

times, but I only did the morning and the afternoon

counts once at -- at the key intersection. The key

intersections were the intersection of Linwood and

Van Dien, and then also the -- the driveways of the

-- of the Hospital.

MAYOR KILLION: Okay.

MR. STAIGAR: So, when I say that, I

know that the peak -- there's several peak hours.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


22

There's -- you have a lot of interaction going on.

You have the Hospital, itself. The Hospital

generates its peak activity when the shift changes.

MAYOR KILLION: Yes.

MR. STAIGAR: That's 7:00, 8:00.

You also have the school also

generating its peak activity almost simultaneously

with that morning shift. And then you have the

normal commuters that are -- that are on the road as

well.

So you really have three activities

going on that generate traffic. So, that -- that

time frame was pretty -- fairly condensed, between

six and 9 a.m., let's say, when all three are

occurring at the same time.

The afternoon is a little bit offset

from one another, because you have the school letting

out between 2:30 and 3:30. You have the shift change

also occurring at the same time, as well, of the

Hospital. But then you have the normal commuters,

the people that live in the area, coming home, say

after 4:00.

So, I keyed in on that seven to nine

time period for those intersections. And then -- but

also took a look at the 2:30 to 3:30, and then the

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


23

4:30 to 5:30 to get the typical rush hour as well as

the start and stop of the school and the Hospital.

Bertin Engineering, the purpose of what

I did was not to -- to absolutely determine my own

traffic volumes, but to -- to gauge whether Bertin

Engineering Associates, whether their traffic counts,

were accurate and credible. So, that was the purpose

of what I did.

And that's why I only did spot counts.

When I say "spot counts", I stayed out there may be

for a half hour on those time periods.

MAYOR KILLION: On page 95, line 23 you

stated:

"During peak hours you have extensive

delays in some of your intersections".

Again, what intersections, just that

one?

MR. STAIGAR: Yes, I -- I -- that may

have been taken out of some context, but it was

typically the intersection of Van Dien and Linwood

Avenue.

And during the afternoon time period,

when the Hospital lets out and the school lets out,

that queuing was in the northerly direction of Van

Dien, in the order of about 27 or 30 cars at times.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


24

So that was -- that was the worse queuing that I saw.

On Linwood Avenue, I think things were

relatively light. But the key -- the big, key

problem I saw was the queuing on Van Dien Avenue in a

northerly direction because then that queued up or

gridlocked the two driveways, the main driveway and

the Kurth Cottage driveway of the Hospital, such that

there was cars gridlocked in the driveways.

And here you have many scores of school

children walking down Van Dien Avenue on the Hospital

side, walking in between stacked cars. And the

traffic -- crossing guards, although they were there

trying to control it, they had a very difficult time

to control that. It's all because of the backup from

Linwood Avenue gridlocking the driveways of the

Hospital.

MAYOR KILLION: What do you mean by

"extensive"? I mean, can you put a number on it or

just it backs up ten minutes, five minutes?

MR. STAIGAR: Well, a good -- well,

yeah, it -- I would say -- I'd say at times over the

course of about 20 minutes.


MR. STAIGAR: And -- and it's very,

very characteristic, particularly for schools, when

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


25

those kids are let out of those doors, that's when

the parents -- they get in the car and they parents

take them out. And it lasts for about 15, 20 minutes

and then it's like a ghost town. But that -- it's

very high intensity for that time period.


The Village Planning Board is the

October 27, 2008, page 10, line 6, you stated that

you have not seen it backed up to John Street.

Was this check only done during peak

hours or did you or any other consultant extend the

hours to, let's say, 6:00.

MR. STAIGAR: Uhmmm.

MAYOR KILLION: When there's peak

traffic for commuters coming home.

Did you just stick to the 3:00 or the

3:15 or did you go into, in your spot checks, 6:00 at

night, and see if it backs up.

MR. STAIGAR: That one, I can't exactly

recall --


MR. STAIGAR: -- when I saw that.

But if it did back up to John Street, I

don't think it would be totally unusual. I just did

not see that.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


26

MAYOR KILLION: Right. And, you know,

my personal observations in these years that I have

seen it, but you're saying, that it is possible that

it would back up to John Street.

MR. STAIGAR: Absolutely. But that

backup probably is not caused or to a significant

degree caused by the Hospital, because the Hospital

at that time probably only a few visitors --

MAYOR KILLION: Right.

MR. STAIGAR: -- a few visitors, but

it's visitors. It's the normal commuter traffic

that's now generating that problem.

MAYOR KILLION: Okay. Also on page 10,

line 20, in the analyses there was no account for

pedestrian traffic.

This was the original report when you

testified?

MR. STAIGAR: Yeah, that was the --

yeah, that was the Bertin Engineering --

MAYOR KILLION: That was done later on

and we'll get to that, correct?

MR. STAIGAR: Correct. I'm sorry, say

that again?

MAYOR KILLION: The pedestrian count

was done subsequently, and it was submitted?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


27

MR. STAIGAR: No, we didn't do -- I

shouldn't say that. I don't think a pedestrian count

was -- you know, a count of pedestrian traffic was

taken, because it varies depending upon the weather

conditions and -- and so forth.

MAYOR KILLION: So, you wouldn't think

that was important, a pedestrian count?

MR. STAIGAR: No, I don't think a

pedestrian count is as specifically important as --

as eliminating the queue. And I'd have to go back

and take a look. I know one of the concerns was how

much -- how much -- how many pedestrians were

crossing the intersection of Linwood and Van Dien,

because that's going to affect traffic flow.

But that's something that's not going

to change, how ever many pedestrians are crossing

today will cross later because they're mainly a

function of the school children coming home or going

to school.

And what I took a look at was I knew

that the major concern was the backup at the

intersection was really related to the fact that

there's only one lane in the southbound direction, a

heavy left turn volume, a fairly heavy north volume.

And those left turns are blocking the through and

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


28

right turns.

So, if we get the left turns out of the

-- out of the way then the through movements and the

right turns can be processed throughout that

intersection.

So really the function -- not

pedestrian traffic, so much, a function of the left

turns to accommodate that use.

MAYOR KILLION: Okay. On line -- we'll

get it by the end of all this.

The same night page 13, line 22, the

report, which I'm assuming you are referring to or it

refers to the Valley Engineering Report, that the

intersection works out very well. You countered on

page 13/26 you go and watch what goes on. It doesn't

work well at all.

MR. STAIGAR: Right.

MAYOR KILLION: Explain the

discrepancies that you found.

MR. STAIGAR: Yeah. There are --

there's soft -- computer software that we can analyze

intersections. And I think what the engineer found

was that at the intersection, and particularly the

driveways -- do you know whether that -- that

referred to the signalized intersection of Van Dien

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


29

and Linwood or the -- or the site - or the Hospital

driveways, specifically?

MAYOR KILLION: I can look it up.

MR. STAIGAR: Okay. No, not necessary.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: The intersection.

MR. STAIGAR: I -- I do recall that, I

-- and the issue there was that the analysis that --

and the software that was used by Bertin Engineering

isolates intersections.

So, when you have a backup from Linwood

Avenue across the Hospital driveways, it's not --

it's not -- that is not included when you analyze

what goes in and out and passed the driveways because

-- because it isolates it.

So -- but you have to look at it as a

whole network. And that was my contention, you

analyze this as a whole network, because what's

happening is traffic is backing up into Linwood

Avenue that's stopping someone from making a left

turn or a right turn at each one of those driveways,

causing the gridlock.

So, whereas they found the levels of

service to be "C" and "D," which is pretty much free

flow conditions.

When I went out there, I didn't see

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


30

that at all. So, I said, you know, one thing you got

to do is you got to calibrate the model to reflect

existing conditions, if you're going to project what

happens in the future or account for that -- that

gridlock condition.


Page 15, line 20, "the Hospital's only

going to increase the beds by three".

And then you go on to say: "The

employee staff may go down by the literature I

read and should not generate traffic".

What literature did you read?

MR. STAIGAR: Oh, well, there was some

-- there was a series of documents that were provided

for the Planning Board, the "Renewal" --

MAYOR KILLION: Yes.

MR. STAIGAR: -- by the Hospital.


MR. STAIGAR: That goes back to it.

MAYOR KILLION: And you relied on that?

MR. STAIGAR: Yes, for that one aspect.

MAYOR KILLION: Sure. And,

theoretically, that could happen, correct?

MR. STAIGAR: It -- it could happen,

yes.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


31

MAYOR KILLION: Sure.

MR. STAIGAR: And I don't know, I'm not

a hospital operator --

MAYOR KILLION: I read that.

MR. STAIGAR: Well -- but, I did

compare it using my tools, what's actually happening

at the Hospital and what should be.

If the Hospital wasn't there, how would

I project how much traffic it was generating? And

what I found it's generating a far more amount of

traffic than a typical hospital.

So, their contention that, as I pointed

out, we've got five pounds in a two pound bag here,

and the Hospital really needs to expand.

And so from all that literature that I

read, that less staff, more diagnostic equipment,

single private rooms as opposed to double rooms, all

kind of made sense to me. And may be, yes, you know

that fits in hand-in-hand with my trip generation

projections.

MAYOR KILLION: Right. I understand

what you're saying, it's just, they're getting

bigger, but employing the same amount of people, more

or less.

MR. STAIGAR: That's what they kept on

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


32

saying. And I was very skeptical it kind of goes

against the grain of what we all know about. If

something gets bigger, it just gets more intense.


MR. STAIGAR: But in this case I found

some credibility when I compared to it my tools of my

trade.

MAYOR KILLION: Let me see, page 16,

line 1, missing piece -- you state: "The missing

piece of the puzzle is the floor area," which I take

it you just explained everything's based on square

footage and that's where the confusion was.

MR. STAIGAR: Well, if you can --no,

you can compare it on a number of -- the ITE, the

Institute of Transportation Engineers is our Bible in

determining trip generation rates or projections.


MR. STAIGAR: And hospitals have it

based on three parameters, the number of beds, the

square feet, and the number of employees.

That's why when Bertin Engineering

said, well, look at -- it you look at only beds,

we're only adding three beds, so we're only adding

five trips.

But, however, you look at the square

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


33

feet, you're adding hundreds of trips. So, that was

the disconnect.


MR. STAIGAR: And that's -- and that's

-- and that's why I wanted a little -- to find a

little bit more credibility and tie that -- that

square feet in. And when I do apply the square feet

as the -- as the parameter to determine how much

traffic I find that Valley generates far more traffic

than it really should be generating.


If Council will just bear with me, I

have one more page to go.

Sorry, if anybody wants to go home and

watch the Giants game, you'll have to watch the

replays.

Page 3 of 3, line 1, you referred to

adding another signal at the driveway of Linwood

Avenue. My question -- and again, just from my

experience, how would another signal alleviate

traffic? Wouldn't it just add to the problem?

MR. STAIGAR: Yes --

MAYOR KILLION: Three signals within a

block, stop and start of the vehicles going with the

signals and all, when you have that many signals in

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


34

that short of a distance, people pulling up,

stopping, waiting for a light, putting their foot on

the gas, going and coming to another one.

Could you explain your logic behind it?

MR. STAIGAR: Well, I think I

discounted that.

And rather than -- we use that, all --

what was happening was the Linwood Avenue driveway

for the Hospital was backing up with a long, long

delay. Somebody would be waiting in the order of two

minutes in order to get out during the peak times.

That leads to frustration, that leads to potential

safety issues.

I have looked at the traffic signal. I

think that was one of the questions that were asked

of me. And I agree with you, traffic signals are not

the answer for every problem.

Although we did take a look at it, but

you're right, that traffic signal between the one at

North Pleasant and the one at Van Dien, would cause

problems. So, I came back with the other options.

One of the options were was that John Street be a

right turn exit only. You eliminated the left turn

into John Street. You picture yourself trying to get

out of your driveway and someone making a left turn

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


35

in front of you, either way, particularly on John

Street, they're going to have the right-of-way before

you can even come out.


MR. STAIGAR: So, we limited -- we did

that. And we were looking at coordinating the two

signals at North Pleasant and at Van Dien so that

they created artificial gaps in traffic. If you shut

off and shut on simultaneously, you would do that.

And my other reason was let's interconnect the

parking decks because at that time when I made that

comment, the parking decks were isolated.


MR. STAIGAR: So that all of the staff

traffic would have to go out to Linwood and on the

level that had the most parking spaces, but if they

were interconnected then someone had it coming down

--down the deck or up the deck, to go out -- also go

out to Van Dien, it would balance itself out.


MR. STAIGAR: So, I think those three

measures were better than the traffic signal.

MAYOR KILLION: On page 54, line 23,

and it goes on quite a while, I think this is a

conversation between you and then Fire Chief Bombace.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


36

Beginning with that page, I see that

there was a great amount of discussion on changing

the walking patterns of the students from BF, routing

them to the opposite side of Van Dien heading south.

You went on to state that the problem

is to try to control pre-teens or young teenagers and

keeping them on that side of the road. You went on

to say great solution in an idealistic world.

But referring to page 10/24 -- I'm

sorry, further on in the report you did agree with

the Valley engineer and said something to the effect

it should be a simple thing to do, referring to

changing kids for walking across the street. I

believe that's on page 11/11. I just want to know

what changed your mind. I mean we all -- we know

kids. And it's very hard to get them, especially,

when they exit on that side of the street, to go up

the street, to go all the way across.

And you seem to state that, but then at

the end on a follow-up letter with your questions,

you then agreed and you said it shouldn't be a

problem.

MR. STAIGAR: Well, if we eliminate the

stacking at the two driveways that are there now, you

go out there and they're gridlocked. And as I said

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


37

the problem is, it's not the teens crossing the

driveway, but the cars sitting in the driveway, the

crossing guard trying to control that traffic but

then also trying to control the kids crossing in

between the cars.


MR. STAIGAR: If we eliminated the

gridlock, so that cars are now properly lined up, you

know behind the stop bar, leaving a crosswalk open

that the guard can now control people coming in and

people coming out, keeping the students waiting and

so forth, it will be a lot easier. But you can't do

it when you got gridlock and you've got cars sitting

in that driveway and in front of the driveway.

MAYOR KILLION: But do you think it's

realistic that you can change students to walk on the

other side of the street in that area.

MR. STAIGAR: No. That was -- that was

the debate we were having. What we really wanted

them to do was at dismissal time cross at Meadowbrook

and walk on the westerly side of -- that seemed like

an easy solution. But trying to control kids who

live on the easterly side of Linwood Avenue might be

a hard time to do.

I don't know, I know we talked about

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


38

it. We debated it for a while what -- you know,

there is a legal right and I don't think you can stop

any citizen from walking on any particular side of

the street. So that was really going to be what

enforcement do you really have.


Just a couple more, January 26th, 2009,

page 7/1. You received a response to review letter

sent January 19th.

What was that letter? Was that a

follow-up letter to questions that the Planning Board

had from previous? I think that was it.

MR. STAIGAR: It could have been, yes.

MAYOR KILLION: Yes.

Basically, in that report we're talking

about the latter report 8-24, page 8-24:

"Pedestrian counts were taken by Bertin

Engineering as well".

So, now we have pedestrian counts, do

you know -- what were the pedestrian counts during

peak hours along with the school driveway and Steilen

Avenue as stated in the report. There are no numbers

in there that could I see.

Do you know those numbers offhand?

MR. STAIGAR: Not off of the top of my

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


39

head, no. I'd have to review my whole file.


MR. STAIGAR: I'm sorry.

Could you gave me those dates again of

-- when I --

MAYOR KILLION: You can refer to it as

the January 26th Planning Board meeting of 2009.

MR. STAIGAR: Okay.

MAYOR KILLION: It would be under page

8 - line 24, "pedestrian counts were taken --

MR. STAIGAR: Okay.

MAYOR KILLION: -- along with Steilen

also".

I know there's not much pedestrian

traffic on Steilen. I saw that in the report.

MR. STAIGAR: Okay.

MAYOR KILLION: Could you send us a

letter of those or we may reserve the right to call

you back if we have other questions.

MR. STAIGAR: Absolutely.

MAYOR KILLION: But could you send the

Council --

MR. STAIGAR: Yes.

MAYOR KILLION: -- a letter of those

pedestrian counts. I couldn't quite find them.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


40

That's all the questions I have.

We'll move on to Councilman Aronsohn.

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: If I can figure

this out.

MAYOR KILLION: I thought you were the

communications rep.

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: You would think.

Does it work? All right.

Thank you for coming tonight, Mr.

Staigar. Thank you for your presentation and all the

work you've done on this.

I want to build on some of the

questions the Mayor has asked you and sort of just --

I want some clarification. I'm trying to put this

all together.

This issue sort of -- the traffic

situation as it exists right now, my understanding

from your presentation that it's your view that right

now the situation is not good.

MR. STAIGAR: No, correct.

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: And so,

irrespective, of any development -- further

development at the Valley Hospital, your suggestion,

your recommendation would be to make some changes,

some of those that you outlined already?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


41

MR. STAIGAR: Correct.

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: And the reason I

ask that is because some of the discussion we had

last week including, I think, a statement made by our

planner was that the Valley Hospital project, if it

was to go forward, would actually improve the traffic

situation in the area.

And just to clarify, it's not that the

Valley proposal of the construction would improve the

situation, it's that it -- it would be necessary to

make some improvements to mitigate some of the

problems that we might have. But we would need those

mitigations regardless, in your opinion?

MR. STAIGAR: Yes, you have an already

existing condition of backups and safety concerns.

If Valley Hospital is true to their

word, and we're not going to increase traffic to any

significant degree, that's not the purpose of what

we're doing. We're going to be way ahead of the

game, because the improvements will improve existing

conditions as they exist today to a very significant

degree.

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: And --

MR. STAIGAR: If Valley Hospital is

lying to us and their traffic increases to a -- to a

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


42

proportionately with the size of the square feet,

then we're back to what we got today.

So, either way, I think we're going to

be whole. We're going to be better, if they -- if

things are true to their word, but even if they

aren't, well, the worse that we're going be, is what

we have today.

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: But we would also

be better if, let's say, putting aside the Valley

Hospital project proposal, if we just made the

enhancements that you outlined, regardless of any

construction going on today.

MR. STAIGAR: Absolutely, yes.

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: So, there's no

casual relationship really, it's just we need to make

some changes at these intersections.

MR. STAIGAR: Correct, yes.

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: When you did your

analysis, and I apologize if you did cover this, I

sort of have blurry eyes reading through some of

these transcripts.

The construction phase versus the

post-construction phase, do you anticipate an

increase in traffic or traffic related problem during

the construction phase?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


43

MR. STAIGAR: No. And the reason being

is that you're not going have the staff -- see, the

big problem that I see is the staff change. And the

shift change. Those cars, essentially, are going be

out of this area, because they're going to put

parking on off-site, satellite location. And you'll

have buses that will go back and forth.

So, if the bus can hold 40 people and

take the place of 40 cars, that is certainly going to

be better than having those 40 cars coming to and

from the site.

So that removal of staff vehicles will

certainly offset any construction equipment and

workers that may be coming in for that work.

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: And when you did

your analysis, I know the Mayor has asked you about,

you know, the spot check that you did and everything,

did you -- were the numbers of inpatients,

outpatients, employees, were they factored into your

analysis? Like you had X amount of people coming in

and out of the Hospital on a given day.

MR. STAIGAR: No.

The only thing we did we stand at the

driveways and we count cars.

And whether that car was a visitor, an

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


44

outpatient or a doctor we don't know or really care.

We know that the Hospital is just generating that

amount of traffic and turns in those directions.

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: So, is it your

view that if the Valley proposal went forward without

any of the traffic enhancements, we'd have a problem

on our hands, because we have a problem on our hands

anyway.


COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: If it went

forward and if, as you said, they are true to their

word and there's no increase in number of patients or

staff, whatever you've got. And in terms of

enhancement that you put forth, everything should

sort of equal out, right?

MR. STAIGAR: It will be better. Well,

if there is no increase in additional traffic --

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: Right.

MR. STAIGAR: -- generated by the

Hospital and the improvements are made, we're way

ahead of the game.

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN0: What percentage

increase in traffic would concern you? Like if you

heard there was going to be maybe a 5 percent

increase in traffic because there was going to be

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


45

more patients or there was going be more -- what

number do you think would sort of concern you?

MR. STAIGAR: You know what, normally

as a rule of thumb we use the magic, a hundred -- an

additional hundred trips.

The Hospital during the p.m. peak hour

is generating 920 during its p.m. peak hour. So, if

it were 10 percent or more, that would be a concern

point.

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: And before I ask

another question, could I ask for clarification of

math just on something.

MR. STAIGAR: Yes.

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: Our Counsel,

because there was an issue, I think somebody raised

it, I don't remember if it was a member of the public

or somebody raised it last week and Mr. Staigar sort

of touched upon it, you know, if that Valley is true

to its word. And they talked about going from 450 to

454 beds.

This current draft ordinance, it speaks

of the intent of -- you know, of this Ordinance is to

keep them at 454, but how binding is that intent, is

that language?

I mean what if they said, you know

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


46

what, we decided we only want 200 single beds and we

want to, you know, double -- have the rest double

rooms. And so, in other words, major expansion.

Is that possible to put the language in

it?

MR. ROGERS: Well, I think the way the

Ordinance is written A lot of it's going to have to

do --

FEMALE AUDIENCE MEMBER: We can't hear

you.

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: Your speaker.

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: Is that better?

MAYOR KILLION: No.

Now it is.

MR. ROGERS: I apologize.

MAYOR KILLION: How's that.

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: That was some

answer.

MR. ROGERS: The Ordinance sets the

parameters, but if the Ordinance was to go through,

there would be a site plan application.

And the site plan application along

with the ensuing documents, one of which is known as

a Developers' Agreement, would contain the parameters

of just where they could go and how far they could go

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


47

with the number of beds and the use and things such

as that.

So, if there were restrictions that

were to be determined by the Planning Board through

that site plan process, and there are requests for

exact restrictions with regard to the number of

patients that could stay overnight in beds or be

admitted, that would probably be reflected in the

Planning Board Resolution of approval and,

thereafter, in the Developers' Agreement.

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: So, that's

something that would come down the road.

In other words, that's not something --

so, this Council, you know, you laid out the options

last week, but there's no way for us to guarantee the

454 beds only.

MR. ROGERS: What we -- what we do or

what our purpose is, is to adopt or not adopt or take

a position with regard to an ordinance that is being

provided as a recommended amendment of the Master

Plan. We don't get into the technical aspects or the

specific aspects of the development that deal with

the restrictions and the enforcement of the desired,

that purpose we leave to the Planning Board or the

Zoning Board if they have the application, but that

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


48

purpose we leave to the development boards because

they're the ones that are more aware of many of the

issues that come down when a plan is brought before

it and developed and approved, you know, such as

restrictions, you know, requirements that must occur

during construction period or limitations on the

number of parking spaces that could be used off-site,

things such as that, they're a lot more familiar with

it. So, we don't get into the nuts and bolts.

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: Okay. I

appreciate that.

MR. ROGERS: So, it would be for us to

mandate that through what wording we would put into

an ordinance if we were to adopt one that would

permit or along with the amendment.

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: I appreciate

that, Matt.

And the reason I asked it, obviously,

you know because Mr. Staigar's testimony, his

recommendations are contingent on no increase. And

we've already heard that an additional 100 visits

during peak time and I don't know how it translates

into additional patients, that in itself could sort

of change his mind, his view of this proposal.

So, I think that's a point that needs

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


49

to be addressed at some point.

My last issue, question, concerns your

statement that Valley is generating far more traffic

than a comparable hospital does and, therefore, it

should expand.

Can you elaborate on that?

MR. STAIGAR: Well, I didn't say it

should expand. I just said it gave some credibility

to their statement that we need to expand to

accommodate the needs of today's hospital with the

amount of activity that we have at the current

hospital. And that's the whole purpose of what we're

trying to accomplish. That was the main message that

the Hospital conveyed to me through their literature

and through whatever testimony there was.

And the only way that I can gauge my

acceptance of that statement is through my trip

generation rates.

And what I found is that it generates

far more traffic than it should be, leaving me to

believe that, yes, it may be more condensed than what

a typical hospital is and, therefore, needs to have

that same activity in a larger area.

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: Right. So as a

traffic consultant and traffic expert, is it your

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


50

view that Valley Hospital, at the present time, is

too large for the neighborhood in which it resides.

MR. STAIGAR: It is too large for? I'm

sorry I didn't hear that?

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: Is it too large

for the neighborhood?

MR. STAIGAR: Oh, I shouldn't -- I --

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: From a traffic

perspective.

MR. STAIGAR: From a traffic

perspective, under the current roadway conditions it

is.

With the improvements that we -- we --

we recommended, as I pointed out in those 12 points,

it will fit a lot better. I'm certainly going to put

a -- there are probably going to be issues that will

go on, but it will operate adequately, I believe.

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: Thank you, very

much.

MAYOR KILLION: Thank you, Councilman.

Councilwoman?

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: You want to go to

me or do you want to go to Tom?

MAYOR KILLION: Whichever.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Go to Tom.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


51

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: Okay.

Mr Staigar -- am I on? Am I on?

AUDIENCE MEMBERS: No.

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: Am I on now?

AUDIENCE MEMBERS: No. We can't hear

you.

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: No?

Dillon, am I on now?

AUDIENCE MEMBERS: Yes.

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: I'm on now.

Mr. Staigar, good to see you again.

MR. STAIGAR: Yes, you look like one

familiar face.

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: That may not be a

good thing or a bad thing, I can't tell.

Let me go back to the pedestrian -- the

discussion related to pedestrian traffic.

You stated that pedestrian traffic

wasn't important when analyzing your traffic data and

you also stated that pedestrian traffic was basically

related to students from BF.

Is that correct?

MR. STAIGAR: That's correct, yes.

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: And in reaching

your decision on the importance of pedestrian

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


52

traffic, did you take into account other pedestrian

traffic like Valley Hospital employees that may walk

to work or may walk from near by bus stops to the

hospital, in forming that decision that pedestrian

traffic wasn't important to your study?

MR. STAIGAR: Well, I -- I -- if I did

say that, I have to take it back. It's -- pedestrian

traffic is important because it affects traffic

movements. And -- and that was one of the -- one of

the points I made in -- in the fact that the computer

analyses that Bertin Engineering did, didn't reflect

existing conditions and what I saw out there because

certainly when one of the crossing guards walked in

the middle of the street and stops traffic in all

directions or in certain directions it's taking away

green time or ability for the cars to process through

that. That's affected by the pedestrian traffic.

But I have to say that from my -- from

my recollection that well over 90 percent of the --

of the pedestrian traffic that I did see were of

school children age and not adults. Very -- very --

I did not -- I don't recall seeing any significant

number of adults walking, particularly during those

hours.

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: Okay. Thank you.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


53

I know you spent an awful lot of time

talking about the way intersections are rated. With

pains, a lot of the discussion about how that is

done.

You referred earlier to the

intersection of Glen and Van Dien and then referred,

you said that that intersection as is rated as an F

intersection. And I remember how you arrived at

that.

I think you also said that Van Dien and

Linwood is also currently graded as an F

intersection?


DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: And if I remember

the testimony, I don't have it written down like the

Mayor does, but my recollection is that you said --

your testimony was that that intersection with

improvements would probably revert to a C or a D?


DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: Is that correct?

MR. STAIGAR: Revert back to a C of a

D.

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: Right.

I also remember that you had testimony

that I guess in the ITE there is a certain amount of

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


54

growth that is projected for intersections, just your

normal traffic growth in the area and so forth.

And my recollection is that it's

somewhere in the one to 2 percent per year; is that

correct?

MR. STAIGAR: Yes.

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: Based on those

projections, if that intersection at Van Dien and

Linwood is corrected and it becomes a C or a D

intersection, at what point does that intersection

become and "F" intersection based upon projected

growth?

MR. STAIGAR: Yes, I -- that's a trial

and error analysis that I would have to do to

determine, well, yes, in the year 2025 we then go

from that -- from that "C", "D" to an "F".

I'd have to increase the traffic

volumes, you know, and find out what -- eventually

how -- how much do I have to increase it in order to

kick off that level of service "F".

That's something I can provide you. I

don't think -- no one's made that analysis. And the

reason being, it's something I think that the Village

needs to know, but in terms of land development it's

what is the traffic growth when the project that

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


55

you're analyzing kick in?

So if they're using a year of 2015 as

their horizon year when they're going to be on line,

the new hospital is going to be built.

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: Right.

MR. STAIGAR: Then that -- that's the

limit as far as we have to go. Eventually the

Village should know, well, all right, that's fine at

that year, what happens, you know, in ten years from

there and when does that intersection go back to

where it was?

We try to limit the amount of time

because we all know that transportation systems are

going to evolve and change, and density may not be

what it is based on that one or two percent. It may

-- it may level off. It may -- it may change.

So we don't -- we don't make those

projections further than five to ten years.

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: So for the benefit

of this Council, is it a simple -- is it as simple as

a mathematical calculation?

In other words, if I had an

intersection that's a "B" intersection now, is there

a specific percentage of growth that takes a "B" to a

"C"? Is it 10 percent? Is it 20 percent? Is it --

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


56

MR. STAIGAR: No.

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: -- is it that

simple?

And just to finish my question, if I

may, if there is -- for argument's sake a two percent

growth per year, so in five years you'd have 10

percent growth. Does that take an intersection to

the next level based upon the 10 percent growth or is

it more than that?

MR. STAIGAR: The -- I'd have to -- I'd

have to take those volumes that we have, increase

them by 10 percent, put them in a computer analysis

and determine what the levels of service are.

If it brings me from a "D" to an "E"

then I know I got to bump it up some more, run it,

and basically have an "E" minus and then do it again.

Run it. And then I get the "F".

So as I said that -- there is a trial

and error. It is a simple mathematic to bump up the

numbers, the volume numbers. But then I need to take

those and throw them into the computer to find out

what the -- what the -- what the Level of Service is.

And that's a trial and error. And it

takes a few iterations, I'm sure.

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: And, again,

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


57

without trying to put words in your mouth, because

I'm not trying to do that to you, based upon what you

know about that intersection and based upon some

limitations in terms of how it can be improved

probably a one shot deal of improvement to that

intersection. You can't do much beyond that.

Does that intersection have the

potential don't the road of becoming another "F"

intersection?

MR. STAIGAR: Yes. Absolutely.

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: That's all I have

right now.

Thanks.

MAYOR KILLION: Thank you, Deputy

Mayor.

Councilwoman?

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Yes. Let me make

sure my microphone is working?

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: Don't blow into

it.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: I'm not going to

blow into it.

Can everybody hear me?

Hi, Mr. Staigar, how are you doing.

I'm glad they asked a bunch of the questions that I

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


58

was going to ask so it kind of brings a little bit of

my questions together.

I wanted to start out with a couple of

facts because if you read through the testimony as

the process went on a couple of the facts changed or

there was some more clarification.

So one of the facts is that currently

Valley has 1730 parking spaces, correct?

MR. STAIGAR: I -- I -- it's in that

range. I know that number is somewhere in there.

It's probably correct.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: May have been

1733. I think it was 1730 was what was mentioned

several times in here.

MR. STAIGAR: Yes.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: And then the

proposed is now 2,000.

But in your analysis they weren't up to

2,000. So there is a little bit of change there,

that is -- that it is 2,000.

MR. STAIGAR: Yes, that's the first

time I'm hearing the number of 2,000.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: So the number that

came to us the finally were 2,000. So we're going

from 1730 to 2,000.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


59

The other thing that I just wanted to

confirm were the shifts -- so the shifts were seven

to 9:00 a.m. that was the --

MR. STAIGAR: No. The shifts are seven

to three, 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., 3:00 p.m. to 11.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Seven to three?

MR. STAIGAR: Yes, 7 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

first -- that's the main shift.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: That's the main

shift.

MR. STAIGAR: That's when the majority

of the staff comes in.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Okay.

MR. STAIGAR: And they leave at three.

The second shift, I guess both -- the

second shift also in terms of volume, is that three

to 11:00 --


MR. STAIGAR: -- shift.

And then you have the midnight shift,

I'll call it, which is the minimum amount of staff

from 11 --

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Eleven to seven.

MR. STAIGAR: Yes.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: And then in your

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


60

testimony you stated that there's about a half hour

shift overlap?

MR. STAIGAR: Yes.

Normally you see those -- the -- the

one shift, people starting to come in before the

previous shift starts to leave. That's when you have

your peak on peak in terms of parking demand

generated by the staff --


MR. STAIGAR: -- because it's a half

hour in there that -- that there is an overlap of

people coming in where people haven't left yet.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Okay. So then

we'll say from the first shift the overlap will be

from 2:30 --


COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Then the next

shift will be from 10:30 p.m.


COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: And then the next

shift would be six --

MR. STAIGAR: Yes, 6:00.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: -- 6:30 in the

morning. Okay.

So, currently, they have 1730 and --

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


61

and everybody has asked questions about the gridlock

coming out of Valley onto Van Dien, not so much for

them coming out on Linwood, but they're pretty much

all letting out on to Van Dien.

There are two -- there are two exits on

Van Dien right now. And then they have their --

their Linwood Avenue, but that's typically not used

for staff, correct? Or is that --

MR. STAIGAR: Currently, I think you

are correct. But that would change with the -- with

the proposal.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Right.

MR. STAIGAR: Linwood would there --

there'd be more volume on Linwood.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: So there would be

more volume coming in the Linwood Avenue?

MR. STAIGAR: In and out.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: In and out. But

--

MR. STAIGAR: But the parking --

parking deck could be tied into the Linwood Avenue

driveway.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Right. So you'd

have more traffic coming down, coming west on Linwood

in. And then it would come out and, again, go west

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


62

on Linwood?

MR. STAIGAR: Or right. But, yes,

probably you'd see more people going to and from the

east.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Okay. So, correct

me if I'm wrong then, so in the proposed construction

you'd have those coming down Linwood Avenue coming

west, turning into the --

MR. STAIGAR: Right.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: -- the parking lot.

Then they'd be leaving that same

entrance/exit and go west. And then where do you

propose that they would go would, maybe turning north

onto Van Dien?

MR. STAIGAR: No. Because they would

most likely have exited out the Van Dien driveway if

they're going to travel Van Dien.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Okay. So you

don't anticipate that there be anybody coming back

out Linwood. You would imagine they would only be

coming out Van Dien to exit.

MR. STAIGAR: Going to the parking.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Go north.


But if they were going to go south then

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


63

they would go -- they would go either driveway, that

kind of gives you the same distance.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: But they'd only be

able to make right-hand turns --

MR. STAIGAR: Oh, no.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: -- regardless.

MR. STAIGAR: No, the right turn --

right hand turn was only for John Street.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: The right hand

turn only is only for John Street.


COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: So if you came out

the Linwood Avenue exit as proposed, you would be

able to make a left --

MR. STAIGAR: Correct. And from my

recollection the latest plans of a year ago or so

that you could make lefts or rights.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: So you'd be

cutting across just before you're going to have two

new lanes of traffic?



Deputy Mayor Riche had asked you a

question and, again, just to cover some of the

information that was in the testimony, the increase

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


64

-- the standard increase or the typical increase in

traffic annually you had as two-and-a-quarter to

two-and-a-half percent?


COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: That's what's in

here.

And you talk about the different

intersections, Van Dien and Linwood, you talked about

the Meadowbrook, but you don't give a rating on

Meadowbrook. You give Van Dien and Linwood,

currently as an "F". You don't give one for

Meadowbrook. And then you give Glen and Van Dien and

Red Birch an "F" as well.

Was there reason why there was no

grading at the Meadowbrook?

MR. STAIGAR: The Bertin Engineering

did not take traffic counts, and that was one of my

comments that they should also analyze the count and

analyze that intersection.

And prior to my coming here, I saw that

one of my -- one of my last review letters, I'm not a

hundred percent sure whether they eventually did that

or not. That's something I'll -- I'll look into too,

whether that was analyzed also.


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


65

MR. STAIGAR: That was the intersection

of Meadowbrook and Van Dien.

But that was one of my recommendations

in my comment letter is that that intersection should

be included in the scope of the study for the

intersection to be analyzed.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Okay. So not

knowing Meadowbrook right now, but if were you to --

and, again, this goes to your experience as a traffic

expert, are there instances where you have several

intersections with an "F" rating and then them all

coming down to a "D" or a "C".

Like how do you -- what's the

cumulative effect when you try to better

intersections if you have an "F" we'll just say we

don't have Meadowbrook right now, we'll give

Meadowbrook a "D".

So if you have an "F", a "D" and "F",

when you fix one intersection does it automatically

fix the others? Or is it more difficult to fix the

other intersections like...

MR. STAIGAR: Yes. The -- in this

network, itself, I don't recall and I have to take a

look at my notes, I don't recall there was any

congestion all the way from -- from Linwood all the

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


66

way to Meadowbrook. I don't think I saw that, that

lengthy, although it may have happened.

When you do have backup from one

intersection to another intersection it does affect

that.

So Level of Service F at Linwood

effected the driveways Kurth Cottage and the main

hospital driveways that they technically and in

reality were Level of Service F.

And the Bertin Engineering analyzed

them, and isolated those intersections, they operated

at "C"s and "D"s. So that's what my -- my comment

was, that's not happening boys because when I go out

there it's gridlock. It's Level of Service F.

And the levels of service, Mr. Riche,

you've heard this, relate to the delays.

So you -- you put in the geometry and

the turning movements and the volumes into the

computer model and it gives you an average delay, how

long does it take for me to make a left-hand turn

from Linwood onto -- onto Van Dien. If it's more

than 60 to 80 seconds it's Level of Service F.

So when I -- when they analyzed the

intersections of the hospital and they calculated

only 20 seconds per delay, they said, okay, it's

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


67

operating at a Level of Service C.

When I went out there in the field and

I watched how long it did take someone to exit out of

the driveways. It was well over 60 seconds and Level

of Service F.

I did not see any major congestion at

Meadowbrook. I don't think that's an intersection

that is of -- of concern in terms of -- of -- of

capacity. However, I still would have liked to take

a look at what those volumes were and how they

interacted with the other intersections and to see

what that Level of Service was, only to complete the

circuit because that's a key intersection. And that

wasn't analyzed. And that's why I made those

comments of let's go out there and let's button it up

and find out what's going on at that intersection.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Okay. You know

you talk about the cycles of traffic and I -- I agree

with you in that my own observations of sitting at

the light at Van Dien, it takes about six or seven

cycles to get through, I think, you know, I sat there

counting the seconds between the lights. And I think

it was like 23 or 24 seconds. So it took about six

or seven cycles to get through.

So the proposed plan would then be to

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


68

have two lanes going south on Van Dien. And then

there would be two lanes traveling west.

MR. STAIGAR: Right.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: So essentially

you'd have --


COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: -- you know, the

turn would be two lanes into one. And then two lanes

into whichever way you're going in the other

directions.

MR. STAIGAR: Well, let me -- well, it

would have to be -- center line would have to be

shifted so that you had a separate left turn lane to

make the left turn on to --


MR. STAIGAR: -- on to Linwood.

And then I believe that the Hospital

was given some right-of-way on the westbound Linwood

Avenue to accommodate a right turn in.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Yes. Yes, I agree

with you. Yup.

So one of the other concerns that you

had, we'll go back to pedestrian, pedestrian traffic,

was that when you start to widen roads to ease the

congestion of the automobiles, you then create and I

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


69

don't -- I don't know if this is the term to use, you

create more of a hazard for the pedestrians because

you're increasing the amount of time that they're in

the roadway.

So you would now be increasing it on

Van Dien. And you would be increasing it on Linwood.

So could you tell us a little bit more

about, you know, those calculation -- like I know

that there was some testimony, our engineer had asked

you some questions about safety islands and whatnot,

but you had stated that you'd still have more time in

the roadway. So, you know, assuming that there's

primarily school children crossing, you're now going

to have two instances where we're widening the road

on increasing the amount of time that they're in the

roadway.

MR. STAIGAR: Yeah.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: So if yo could

just maybe explain that a little bit.

MR. STAIGAR: Yes. And that's -- and

that's a balancing. You have to find out how to --

how to -- how to figure out, it will increase another

12 feet. Another lane is 12 feet of distance.


MR. STAIGAR: These are - these are

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


70

middle -- middle school kids and -- and typically

crossing about three to four feet per second.

So there's an additional three to four

seconds that they'll in the so-called -- in the road.

With these improvements, however, my

recommendation was also to bring these intersections

up to the latest current standards for pedestrian

safety as well. Have the countdown signals, the

pedestrian heads, where you push the button -- and

what happens is when you do push the buttons then

enough time is allotted for that pedestrian to cross

the street.

So by making those pedestrian

improvements, push buttons as well as the heads with

the -- with the second count down that you have, that

pedestrian knows that he has sufficient time to cross

or not to cross.

There are -- during the peak periods

crossing guards are always at that intersection as

well to ensure the children safety as well. We're

also concerned about the off-peak time period, but

those -- those improvements, proper signage, traffic

control measures, crosswalk enhancements.

Now, there could be what we call a

tabled crosswalk where it's only elevated an inch but

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


71

--

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Yes.

MR. STAIGAR: But reflective painting,

raised -- we call you it Permaflex painting as well,

to enhance that -- that crossing safety as well.

So all those would be implemented. My

recommendation is that all of that would be

implemented into the -- into a signal as well.

That'll offset that additional 12 feet

that that pedestrian needs to cross.


So now let's talk about the crossing

guards because there's a lot of testimony about

crossing guards, in that the crossing guards, for

lack of a better term, runs the intersection. And

that it's up to the crossing guard to decide when to

cross the kids and how long to stay in the

intersection.

So we've got the crossing guard at Van

Dien and Linwood. We have the crossing guard at

Meadowbrook. I believe Valley Hospital has their own

individual at their -- one at their Van Dien

entrances, I've driven by.

MR. STAIGAR: I saw them at both --

both Van Dien driveways.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


72

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Both Van Dien

driveways.

MR. STAIGAR: And also at the Linwood

driveway.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: And also at the

Linwood driveway. Okay.

And then we have a crossing guard at

the corner of East Glen and Van Dien.

MR. STAIGAR: Yes.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: So we've got --

we've got crossing guards, so I wanted to -- so I

wanted to try to get an idea of if you've got, let's

just say, it's -- it's in the -- in the morning so it

would be the morning shift time, you've got

individuals coming down from 17 and they're being

stopped at Glen and Van Dien. Then they're making a

left. Then they're being stopped again at

Meadowbrook. You know, is there -- is there any

information that you can give us in terms, again,

when you start analyzing or observing stop, go, stop,

go traffic, does that affect any of your calculations

in terms of rating the intersections?

MR. STAIGAR: No, I -- I -- I think

there's enough separation between those driveways

that they don't -- or those intersections that they

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


73

did not affect traffic flow.

The driveway crossing guards stop

traffic from -- I guess they stop traffic from -- I'm

not quite -- you know what, I can't remember. I --

they stop traffic from exiting --

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: From exiting.

MR. STAIGAR: And I'm trying to

recollect whether they stop traffic from entering.

I'm sure they had to because if they stop traffic

from exiting and wave these kids on and all of the

sudden someone comes along and wants to make a left,

well, they need to stop that left turning movement as

well.

But, primarily, they would be stopping

the -- the -- the driveway exiting, which doesn't

effect the traffic flow on the -- on the main -- main

street.

Linwood Avenue, the same way, they're

not stopping traffic on -- on Linwood Avenue, at the

Linwood Avenue driveway. It's only the two

intersections. And then the three intersections of

Linwood, Van Dien -- well Van Dien with Linwood,

Meadowbrook and then with Glen and Birch.


MR. STAIGAR: But they're far enough

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


74

apart that they don't -- they're not going to stop

traffic long enough to cause a backup all the way

from one into the other.


And, again, I think the Mayor had asked

questions about the volume of children that cross the

intersection. And in the testimony it was -- it was

about a hundred.

MR. STAIGAR: I -- I -- yes, I don't

know why that -- that's what -- the one thing that

slipped out of my -- my thought process. And I'll

check back into that as well. That's probably about

-- about right, a hundred per hour.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: So the majority of

the kids -- we'll make the assumption the majority of

school children are coming from BF?

MR. STAIGAR: Yes.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Benjamin Franklin

Middle School has about 700 children, I believe about

200 are bused because there are children that live on

the other side of the highway. There are children

that live -- that came from the Hawes District, some

from Somerville.

So we've got about 500 kids left that

exit the school, let's just -- you know, you're

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


75

making a guess at a hundred and if you look at the

cars queuing up at pick up, I can't even believe that

there'd be a hundred cars queuing up so I guess I'm a

little skeptical at the hundred number because there

are at least another four to 500 kids exiting the

school and where that --

MR. STAIGAR: But that's -- I wouldn't

believe that that that's the total that are walking

two and from the school, that might be the total that

went through the intersection at Linwood and --

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Per hour.

MR. STAIGAR: Right. At Linwood and

Van Dien per hour.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Per hour. So

we'll then assume that kids have either

extracurricular activities and they're letting out at

different -- different times.

MR. STAIGAR: Different times and also

going different directions also.


MR. STAIGAR: A child that walks down

Van Dien southbound, but then made a right-hand turn

and walked down Linwood --


MR. STAIGAR: -- would have crossed.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


76


MR. STAIGAR: Additionally you have a

lot of crossing at Meadowbrook there's other -- other

children going to the north and to, you know, where

Birch and Glen is --


MR. STAIGAR: -- so they -- they -- the

hundred is probably not too far off because if the

difference is 500 that you're talking about, a

hundred of them going down Van Dien --

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: You think that's a

pretty accurate number.

MR. STAIGAR: And crossing -- yeah.

Crossing Linwood, kind of makes sense.


So now we're talking about everybody

exiting and leaving the school. We talked about them

coming to the school assuming they -- they walk to

school as well as they walk home. And then there's a

mixture of parents pick up and drove off.

Benjamin Franklin Middle School

underwent some renovations and they added a track

they -- they increased the recreational facility.

They changed the recreational facility. So now they

have a track that is considered to be the high school

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


77

track.

So come this spring it will be the

first season that it's open. We're going to have a

different traffic pattern. We're presumably going to

have children coming from the high school, walking

from the high school through that intersection now.

So the hundred -- let's just say the

hundred is an accurate number. Now, we're going to

have I don't know how many kids are on the track

team, but we're now going to have the high school

track team making their way down Van Dien through

that intersection.

And I'm going to assume that the high

school lets out a little earlier so that the traffic

pattern is going to start earlier.

So it sounds like it's going to hit

your peak shift change. So --

MR. STAIGAR: Probably, yes.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: So could you,

perhaps, discuss how that's going to maybe change

that traffic at that intersection because we're

already at an "F" we were hoping that this new plan

was going to bring us up to a "C" or a "D".

But if we're going to add a volume of

pedestrian now coming from a different location or

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


78

coming in the opposite location, how do you feel

that's going affect it?

MR. STAIGAR: Well --

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: And, again --

MR. STAIGAR: Well, if it's in the

order of more than a hundred children that are going

to be coming from the high school the track in an

hour then, yeah, it may have an impact on that

intersection at that point in time.

A lot of it's going to be how -- how

the -- how the crossing guard processes those kids.

If they queue up the kids so that there's 10 or 20 of

them as opposed to stopping traffic every time one

shows up, then that is going to affect the flow of

vehicular traffic as well.

So it's really how the crossing guards

themselves or herself processes -- processes the

kids.

Again -- but then taking a look at it

from the -- stepping back and taking a look at that,

that's a condition that you have currently.

So if a hundred more track kids show up

under existing conditions, what you have today is

going to get worse.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Correct.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


79

MR. STAIGAR: But if you improve the

intersection by -- by increasing the capacity of the

intersection so that when the traffic has the green

light, when the kids are waiting and you can process

those vehicles -- more vehicles than you can today,

again the result would be less queuing.

So either way that affect of the

additional pedestrians is going to have a detrimental

effect. But whether it has a detrimental effect on a

-- to an nth degree on existing conditions, it'd be

much worse than if it had a -- a -- a detrimental

effect of also the nth degree under the proposed

improvement.


So now we'll go back to traffic

patterns again. Currently, you can leave John Street

and make a left or a right.

And now you're going to -- we're

proposing that you're going to be making a right turn

only?


COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: So we're going to

be making a right turn only, did you analyze and how

that would impact the properties now that are going

to be getting, perhaps, traffic -- a different

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


80

traffic pattern to the North Pleasant light?

Now, we've got a different aspect.

We've widened the road so everybody could make a

left, but now they're going to hit a bottleneck at

North Pleasant.

MR. STAIGAR: Yes. And I note -- I was

looking for the traffic report, but the volume of

traffic that's currently making that left was rather

small, very small. And --

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: From John?

MR. STAIGAR: From John Street, right.


MR. STAIGAR: And actually the John

Street volumes were very light to begin with so -- so

by changing those traffic patterns the -- the -- you

know, not -- and -- and the fact that not one

intersection would bear the brunt of displaced

traffic would have a net effect that it would not be

significant and if I may... yeah, the -- okay.

Yeah, here we go.

I just I -- I picked one -- one figure

coming out of John Street there were in the -- in the

morning there were two lefts and one -- and in the

p.m. one left, whereas there were 20 rights and 12

rights in the a.m. and p.m.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


81

So the predominant flow is --

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Is only the right.

MR. STAIGAR: Is the Right turn out

only.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: So it wouldn't

really have an affect.


COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Just bear with me

one second I just want to go through this (pause).

I just wanted to ask a couple of other

questions going back to your summary at the beginning

that there was a discrepancy or a concern that you

had about the trip generation with the expansion. So

as Councilman Aronsohn had mentioned, you're relying

on good faith that what the Hospital was saying is

what they're going to do.

MR. STAIGAR: Well, not a hundred

percent, but I think we are taking that and

questioning it and see if it makes sense.

And I think what this whole process is

let's have some safeguards and some controls so that

this thing doesn't get blown out of -- out of -- out

of proportion that -- that we do keep a lid on how

much activity this Hospital is generating.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Okay. And -- and

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


82

the reason I ask is that when you read the testimony

there's at least, I think, 20 times where you use the

word "skeptical". You use the word, you just don't

see it. You remained, through most of it, very

concerned that the proposal can actually be done as

planned with the statistics that you were given.

Have you worked on any other projects

where you had similar statistics, you know we're

relying only on Valley, you do this every day. So

have there been other instances where you can, you

know, share with us where things have matched

statistics or... you know I know that's a tough

question to ask but --

MR. STAIGAR: It's really not.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: You used the words

you know I could go through and say all the different

statements: "I just don't see it"; "it fails to

isolate"; "it goes against the grain"; "it's lip

service". I mean these are all statements that you

made throughout.

MR. STAIGAR: Yes. And I --

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: So --

MR. STAIGAR: And then at the --

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: And then at the

end you say it could be if everything, you know,

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


83

falls into place.

MR. STAIGAR: Yes. In -- in -- in all

the years that I've done what I'm doing, and not only

from a traffic perspective, but from a business

perspective, you need a return on your investment.

And if -- and if someone's making a multimillion

dollar decision to do something, how do you get that

return in back if -- and the only way you can do it

is if you increase your money, input of the money

that you're making. And this is simple -- simple

basic development understanding.

And, normally, when I have always seen

developers or development occur, it increases

intensity. That's the only way you can make back

from the investments that you -- that you've made.

So that's why that whole -- my whole

first half of -- of my review was that it just

doesn't make any sense to me that you're going to

invest multimillion dollars but -- but not increase

activity, not increase your -- your input of your --

of the money coming -- you're going to get back. And

so I went back and I read the literature. The

literature makes sense to me, but it's all it is is

literature.

And the only tool that I have to say,

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


84

well, maybe they are right in what they're saying

because I'm finding when I do my own investigation,

I'm finding that the Hospital generates more traffic

than it really -- it really should be. So it gave

some credibility to that.

But then the other aspect was that even

if we -- even if, as I said, they're lying to us and

they're going to increase the amount of traffic

proportionate with the amount of square feet that

they're expanding, si if I take those numbers, if

they're -- if they're generating a thousand cars now

with 500 square feet and -- a day, that was -- no, I

shouldn't say that, an hour. They're generating 920

cars an hour during the peak hour, they go out all

three driveways, in and out all three driveways.

That's in and out. And they -- and they're actually

going to almost double that number because I heard --

I don't know what the ultimate square footage was,

but it was somewhere in the order of about 900,000.

They'll go from five something to 900,000 I think the

number was. And I.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: It was 998.

MR. STAIGAR: Is that right?

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Yes, that is

right.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


85

MR. STAIGAR: So close to it. And if I

increase the traffic by that amount too and I ran it

through that Linwood and -- and Van Dien

intersection, it got us to where we are today.


MR. STAIGAR: So that was the only --

it's -- the relief that I felt was that the

responsibility of any developer is you're going to

degrade something, bring it back to what we have

today. You can make it better than we have today,

but your minimum is to bring it back to what we have

today. And if that's what they can do, then all of

it -- if in the worse case scenario all of the

projections are indeed wrong, that they're trying to

pull the wool over our eyes, and they're actually

going to almost double the amount of traffic, well,

we -- we're back to where we are today.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: We're back to

today.

MR. STAIGAR: Yes. And -- and -- and

so I -- but that's why I said I -- I -- I found some

credibility in the literature I read and I compared

it to my tools and it kind of made sense to me.

But even if it wasn't, we'd have that

to rely upon.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


86


Those are the only questions that I

have.

MAYOR KILLION: Any follow-up?

(NO RESPONSE.)

MAYOR KILLION: I have one, couldn't it

be we're talking about why the expansion, couldn't it

be simply Valley wants a more efficient operation and

a more healthy operation?

MR. STAIGAR: Correct. I -- I --

MAYOR KILLION: Does it need to be --

does it need to be money motivated?

MR. STAIGAR: I don't know. I can't

answer that because that's --

MAYOR KILLION: Right, but that could

be a reason, a more efficient --

MR. STAIGAR: Yes.

MAYOR KILLION, -- more healthy

environment?

MR. STAIGAR: Right. I agree.

CHAIRMAN ANHALT: Any other questions?

(NO RESPONSE.)

MAYOR KILLION: Okay. Before we move

forward, it's been requested a one minute stretch by

the Council and the audience. Don't leave the room.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


87

Stand up. It's like a seventh inning stretch. The

seats are a little uncomfortable as you can tell.

(Whereupon, a brief recess is taken.)

MAYOR KILLION: Would everybody please

sit down, we're going to start the meeting up again.

We reserve the right to call you back

--

MR. STAIGAR: Yes.

MAYOR KILLION: -- if that's okay, to

follow up on the questions?

Thank you very much for your summary

and answering the questions.

MR. STAIGAR: My pleasure. My pleasure

to be here.

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: Thank you.

MS. MAILANDER: Let me just do a roll

call.

MAYOR KILLION: Roll call.

MS. MAILANDER: Councilman Aronsohn?

COUNCILMAN ARONSOHN: Here.

MS. MAILANDER: Councilman Riche?

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: Here.

MS. MAILANDER: Councilwoman Walsh?

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: Here.

MS. MAILANDER: Councilman Wellinghorst

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


88

is absent.

And Mayor Killion?

MAYOR KILLION: I'm here.

MS. MAILANDER: Okay.

MAYOR KILLION: Okay. We're now going

to have comments from the public. All who wish to

speak must sign up prior to the beginning of the

meeting and will speak in order of sign-in. There's

a three minute time limit per person. Each person

may speak only once per meeting.

If you came in late and you still wish

to speak, you can see the clerk to sign up. But,

again, we're going to go to 10 o'clock.

MS. MAILANDER: Mayor, could I just ask

are you going to let the attorneys speak first?

MAYOR KILLION: Just a second. I'll

take care of it.

MS. MAILANDER: Okay.

MAYOR KILLION: I'm not finished my

statement. Thank you.

We're now going to hear from the

attorneys on both sides.

Didn't we go through this last time? I

shouldn't have paused.

MS. MAILANDER: That's right.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

J. Lamb - Public Comment


89

MAYOR KILLION: Again, we allowed a

little extra time on the first meeting, we're going

to stick to the three minute rule. Last time Mr.

Collins spoke, so it's only fair to --

MS. GOLDFISCHER: Absolutely.

MAYOR KILLION: -- to have opposing

counsel speak.

MR. LAMB: I'm happy to do that,

thanks.

MAYOR KILLION: Thank you very much.

Everybody tries to help me up here and

I appreciate it.

MS. MAILANDER: Sorry.

MAYOR KILLION: You don't have to be

sorry.

MR. LAMB: Good evening, Mayor, and

Members of the Council. My name is John J. Lamb from

the law firm of Beattie Padavano. I represent the

Concerned Residents of Ridgewood, a non-profit

corporation.

I'm going to go through in three

minutes a very quick, but important outline.

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: Excuse me, can you

move the microphone a little bit closer to you?

MAYOR KILLION: Yes.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



90

MR. LAMB: What we heard here today,

which I can really describe as the perfect storm,

we've got Level of Service F at very busy

intersections. You've got a parking management plan

that doesn't work at the current time. You have,

basically, parking that is insufficient or marginally

sufficient. And you have a school that seems to have

increased capacity.

And in these circumstances, in this

perfect storm, what you have is a proposal to add,

whatever that number is, 600,000 to 800,000 square

feet. That is a substantial increase.

One of the things to discuss is why

don't the numbers work? The average trips generated

for this Hospital need to be more.

What I did this afternoon, I just got

my new ITE booklet, the 8th Edition. And I opened it

up and looked at the definition of hospital. And the

definition of hospital has a specific inclusion for

clinics, which is defined as outpatient services.

So, essentially, that ITE manual does not include

something that's called a clinic or an outpatient

service.

Could that not be the explanation for

why there's so much activity here, because this

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



91

facility has two components. It has the traditional

hospital, but it also has the outpatient services.

And if you read the 30 plus Planning

Board hearings, you see that's the wave of the

future. That's what's happening. That's being

increased. So we have an outpatient service

component that is substantial.

The other thing is, you've heard Mr.

Staigar say three ways to handle this measurement:

Number of beds; number of employees; area, the size

of the building.

Their expert only went on number of

beds, said we can go up to a million-two, a million

300,000 square feet, since I only added three beds

that's six trips.

Does anybody really think -- and as Mr.

Staigar admitted as one of his last answers to the

questions, that a hospital is going to spend $750

million and not have an increase in business to

generate that?

That -- that defies belief.

One of the things when you do these

methodologies, you take the most conservative one.

And what -- the Bible, as Mr. Staigar said, the ITE

manual is the Bible. And the Bible says that this is

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



92

going to add 75 percent more trips because the size

is increased. That's what the Bible says. That's

what that book, a green book that I can show you,

that's what that says.

However, something very simple. Valley

and the experts are looking at it saying, ignore the

Bible. We're not going to increase that. We're not

going to increase the numbers. If you look at Mr.

Staigar's comments in his May 26, 2009 report --

(Bell Rings.)

MR. LAMB: -- 51 single pages, single

spaced pages, he specifically says that that is a

problem.

I'm just going to go very quickly.

There's a problem admitted with the parking

management plan. It's a problem right now.

One of the other things is that Traffic

Impact Study only covers Phase One. That's a

critical factor. It only covers Phase One. It does

not cover Phase Two.

And that seems to be understated. And

the 51 page report, there's only one line that says,

this only covers Phase One. It doesn't cover Phase

Two.

But, yet, the Master Plan Amendment and

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

R. Goldfischer - Public Comment


93

the proposed Zoning Ordinance cover all the phases,

cover that 1.2 million --

MAYOR KILLION: I'm going to ask you to

wrap it up please?

MR. LAMB: Yes. Thank you.

There's an acknowledgement that none of

the intersections were studied. There were problems

with spacing. There's always the discussion of let's

get shuttles from other areas, but yet we don't know

where those other areas are. We don't know where the

traffic pattern is proposed. We don't know the

routes of the other areas.

We ask you not to jeopardize Ridgewood

because of a false assumption or polemic assumption

that there'll never be an increase in employees or

business at this facility.

MAYOR KILLION: Thank you.

MR. LAMB: Thank you.

MAYOR KILLION: I think that was closer

to four minutes, so you have four minutes also.

MS. GOLDFISHER: Thank you.

Good evening, my name is Robin

Goldfisher. And I'm the Vice President and General

Counsel for the Valley Health System.

I'm here this evening representing

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



94

Valley in Chuck Collins' absence.

At the last meeting there were several

questions about Valley's plans for the future and

whether they're called expansion or a renewal. We

call our plans for the future "Renewal" because they

do just that. They allow Valley to renew the

Hospital while fulfilling our mission to serve our

community.

Valley's past success has been its

ability to meet the healthcare needs of the community

it serves, but those needs are ever changing.

Healthcare is different today than it

was in the past. And it will be different in the

future than it is today. New technology and new ways

of delivering patient care drive the need to evolve.

And, yes, to provide greater square footage to

accommodate larger diagnostic equipment and treatment

rooms for life changing technology like our soon to

be installed Gamma Knife or the single patient rooms

that provide better clinical outcomes and accommodate

new ways of delivering care.

If Valley is to continue its

longstanding tradition of delivering high quality

patient care, it must be able to evolve to meet those

challenges.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



95

At the last meeting several Council

Members asked why Valley went before the Planning

Board for a Master Plan Amendment. Although Chuck

Collins addressed this question, I believe it's worth

revisiting.

Valley appeared before the Planning

Board at the suggestion of the Village's Board of

Adjustment.

At the conclusion of Valley's request

for a 7,000 square foot addition to its emergency

department in 2002, members of the Board of

Adjustment asked Valley to develop a long term

facility plan and to take that plan to the Planning

Board.

In fact, this suggestion had been made

several times over the years, indicating that the

Planning Board would be a more appropriate venue to

review the needs of the Hospital and balance those

needs with the needs of the surrounding neighborhood

and the larger community which Valley serves.

Several Council Members also questioned

Valley being referred to as a "regional" hospital.

The American Hospital Association broadly defines all

hospitals that are non-federal, as community

hospitals. By definition, this would include:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



96

Englewood Hospital; Hackensack University Medical

Center; Holy Name Hospital; and, yes, Valley.

Valley is also considered a regional hospital as well

when you consider the nature of the services we

provide, and by its definition is inherently

beneficial.

For example, cardiac surgery, radiation

oncology, our neonatal intensive care and pediatric

intensive care units are all regional hospital

services. These services are best provided at fewer

hospitals that can attract and retain physician

experts and staff with sufficient volume to ensure

their expertise in a given field. This is why Valley

is considered a regional hospital.

Questions were asked at the last

meeting about the Greenfield option that the Hospital

consider deciding to renew our campus. The

Greenfield option would require approximately 30

acres of land because we've planned not only to build

a new hospital, but to consolidate all of our other

outpatient and administrative services on one campus.

Theoretically, this is a good idea.

Practically speaking, however, it was not achievable

and unaffordable.

So, now I want to address the real

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



97

concern that might have been behind this question,

which is: If Valley needed 30 acres, why is the mere

16 acres that it now inhabits sufficiently sized for

"Renewal"?

The campus that we currently inhabit is

sufficiently sized because it is maintained

predominantly for inpatient services. And Valley

maintains upwards of ten other locations for certain

outpatient and administrative services, which we

continue to develop.

(Bell Rings.)

MS. GOLDFISCHER: Finally, one of the

speakers of the last meeting stated that only a small

percentage of Ridgewood residents uses Valley often.

I'd like to offer another perspective.

I asked our planning staff to do some

research and found that in a given year Valley has

more than 19,000 patient contacts with Ridgewood

residents alone. That equates to each household in

the Village of Ridgewood using the Hospital almost

two-and-a-half times a year. This can hardly be

considered a small number.

I'll conclude by thanking the members

of the Village Council for their continued effort to

move this process forward. Valley's mission is to

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

G. Cornell - Public Comment


98

serve the community with the best possible care and

service, but to do so we need to be allowed to evolve

to meet the healthcare needs of residents of

Ridgewood and the greater communities we serve.

Healthcare is not commercial development. Our goal

isn't to increase our patient load. We're investing

in the continuing health of our community. And, to

do, so we need to be able to renew.

Thank you.


Well, we finally got that down, it was

the Board of Adjustment that started all this, so

we'll speak to those guys.

We're now going to hear comments, and

comments only, from the public. The clerk will read

your name off, would you please come up and identify

yourself.

MS. MAILANDER: Eugene Cornell?

MR. CORNELL: Gene Cornell, 623 Belmont

Road, President of Ridgewood Residents for Valley.

I'm not going to belabor, I'm only

really here to just add points and things that need

to get into the record.

One point I want to make is in recent

reporting comments were made to the effect that RRV

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

G. Cornell - Public Comment


99

is primarily an organization of doctors and staff of

Valley. We did some analysis, our 625 named members

include 24 doctors, who are affiliated with Valley

and ten employees who work for Valley. So the

respective percentages are 4 percent and under 2

percent of the 625 total membership.

A couple of other points, quickly, you

know, the word expansion can be looked at multiple

ways.

Again, the goal is not to expand the

population or usage, but just the square footage, so

it can accommodate necessary equipment.

I think the point is actually clarified

by the speaker tonight because he said basically

Valley is getting the traffic that you'd expect in a

much bigger facility. And that's really kind of like

with a condensed hospital. It doesn't have the space

it needs to really work well.

And you saw that when Rashid Dr.

Vaddoura spoke last week, where you have to actually

move two beds out to get one bed out to the hallway

that -- where you really are treating the patient

that needs to be treated.

So, it's not to increase the usage in

terms of people coming and going. It's just

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

J. Tuomey - Public Comment


100

increasing the efficiency and the type of care that

we provide, that Valley provides.

And, lastly, I just wanted to talk

about the equation of Valley and Paramus Park because

I really did not agree with the equation. You know,

you talk about beneficial use last week and that's

because Valley Hospital saves lives. I don't think

Paramus Park considers saving lives. I think it's

actually just waste a lot of time and energy, very

often. And I don't see the two --

MAYOR KILLION: And my credit card.

MR. CORNELL: And that's right. Thank

you.

And then one other point I -- the

attorney for The Concerned Residents, pretty much

outpatient care is now outside of the main campus,

Luckow, I estimate there were 600,000 trips moved off

to Luckow. So I don't think those comments about

the, you know, outpatient going on at the same

facility is actually correct.

Thank you for your time.


MS. MAILANDER: Janet Tuomey?

MS. TUOMEY: Good evening. My name is

Janet Tuomey, T-u-o-m-e-y, 59 John Street, Ridgewood,

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



101

New Jersey.

And I'd like to comment before I start

my statement that I was an employee of the emergency

room at Valley Hospital and it was a very agreeable

number of years there, many years ago.

And I have been a 30 year employee of

the Village of Ridgewood, which was also a very

wonderful experience.

And I just wanted to put that down.

I'm going to, you know, move my paragraphs around

because I don't know if I can speak as quickly as you

did or as Mr. Cornell did. So if it doesn't all flow

well, you'll excuse it.

In the summary of planning -- and my

comments are to kind of answer some of the questions

that related last -- last week.

Then -- now I'm going to start, all

right?

MAYOR KILLION: Wait a minute now.

MS. TUOMEY: I have notes --

MAYOR KILLION: All right. You blind

sided me from now on -- and I'll let you go with this

one cause we've worked together before.

MS. TUOMEY: Oh, thank you.

MAYOR KILLION: Anyone else, their

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



102

resume will account for their time, moving forward.

All right.

MS. TUOMEY: In the summary of -- In

the summary of planning and zoning issues presented

by Mr. Brancheau, Ridgewood's Village Planner, he

cited the opposition to Valley's expansion from

citizens who were concerned about setbacks, noise,

lights, traffic and congestion in the area. And with

the quality of life that would disappear.

Mr. Brancheau made a glaring omission

and that was that there was no mention at all of the

health and safety of our children within the

immediate area which includes students at Travell and

Benjamin Franklin Middle School and little ones in

their own neighborhoods near Valley.

This significant omission is

reminiscent of the Planning Board's basic disregard

of our issues as parent after parent and grandparent

brought it up at the meetings. There were many, many

people who spoke on that subject throughout the

meetings that were held.

Now, I'm going to go out of context.

All right, last paragraph, another issue, as we all

know hospitals now do not keep patients, inpatients,

for long periods. They will be utilizing outpatient

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



103

services more and more in the future. That is one

reason for all the technology anticipated in the

future for more outpatient service and testing.

The financial health of institutions

will also depend on outpatient services.

I asked Mr. Staigar, and I just talked

to him a minute ago, he remembered me. He said,

"you're the nurse". I said, "yes, I am".

MAYOR KILLION: I remember you also.

MS. TUOMEY: I asked Mr. Staigar about

the possibility of filling those 2,000 parking

spaces, theoretically this is, twice or even three

times a day with the -- with the right patterning.

And he said, yes. Yes, it's possible.

I asked him that as a question at one

of the last meetings at the end. And he said,

simply, yes, it's possible.

So, instead of 2,000 cars, we could

have four. We could have more than that. We could

have as many as -- as it would fill, if the

patterning of outpatients could be accommodated.

After all this is a business, a good

business, but it's a business, remember that.

All right. Both Mr. Collins and Mr.

Brancheau mentioned at the start of the meetings that

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



104

they started in 2006. In early 2007 --

(Bell Rings.)

MS. TUOMEY: -- I'm brought up -- the

Planning Board started the meetings. What neither

one mentioned is that the enormous scope of the

project was so thoroughly obfuscated that it was not

until almost the summer of 2009 that we found out

that the square footage was going to be up to a

million square feet. And now it's more than that.

MAYOR KILLION: I'm going to have to

ask you to wrap it up please.

MS. TUOMEY: Okay. That's too bad. I

have two great more paragraphs.

MAYOR KILLION: Well, you can come to

the next meeting and get here early, sign up, and

we'll hear the other two paragraphs.

MR. ROGERS: Please, if I may, Mayor?

MAYOR KILLION: Yes.

MR. ROGERS: If I may?

I know the Council is aware of it, but

I just want to make a general comment. The Council

can't accept hearsay testimony about what someone

else said.

If it's in the record from the

transcripts of the Planning Board hearings, that's

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



105

certainly fine. We've been able to review that.

But any comments made by a recent

conversation outside the purview of the Planning

Board transcripts, we can't take hearsay testimony.

So what you told us about what Mr. Staigar said, we

really can't accept that.

MS. TUOMEY: Okay. But you could

accept that's in the record.

MR. ROGERS: Well, if it's in the

record we can certainly consider it, but if it's not

we can't -- -

MS. TUOMEY: It is in the record, Mr.

Rogers.

MR. ROGERS: All right. We'll take

that under advisement. I'm giving a general

instruction with regard to the Council.

MS. TUOMEY: My question to him was in

the record.

MR. ROGERS: Ma'am, I'm giving a

general instruction to the Council.

MAYOR KILLION: Okay. It's in the

record.

MS. TUOMEY: Thank you.

MS. MAILANDER: Cathy Benson?

MAYOR KILLION: Your time starts when

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

C. Benson - Public Comment


106

you get to the microphone.

MS. BENSON: Ask me my name and my

address.

MAYOR KILLION: No, when you get to the

microphone.

Time.

MS. BENSON: All right.

I would like to thank the Council for

asking --

MS. MAILANDER: Name and address,

please?

MS. BENSON: See.

MAYOR KILLION: I know.

MS. BENSON: Cathy Benson, 572 Fairway

Road.

I would like to thank the Council for

great questions that I did not hear from the Planning

Board, that's number one.

And so it doesn't leave me much to say

about the traffic, except that, number one, you left

out the Travell kids that cross the intersections

also.

I don't know how any come up, but

Travell is up past the Hospital and across the street

in Linwood.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



107

Also, you neglected how many cars now

come down my road to avoid the intersections.

Fairway Road, my kids used to play in the street.

And in the mid '90s they didn't play in the street

anymore because of all the frustrated drivers that

started coming down our road to avoid Linwood and Van

Dien intersection.

And, most importantly, in looking at

other hospitals, at the numbers and intensity, nobody

looked at other hospital locations and their road

services to them.

And most all of them, that I know of,

in Bergen County and beyond, have four lane access,

four lane roads that access these hospitals. And

they also have public transportation, which Valley

does not have.

And in these days of sustainability and

stuff, it is better to lower the parking number than

the zoning, and to provide public transportation,

which Valley cannot support because it doesn't have a

four lane access. And it also is in the wrong

location right now for the size of the property --

the size and the intensity of use.

Thank you. Thank you.

MS. MAILANDER: You could keep going.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



108

You have time.

MS. BENSON: Okay.

And then let's go to Valley's

truthfulness. I'm not going to call them liars or

truthful, but back in the '90s when they did the MRI

and they testified that their parking was sufficient,

they got a parking variance. You can see now that it

wasn't sufficient. Did they lie? I don't know. But

they can't tell us ten years from now what it's going

to be. And we can't. For all we know they get a

certificate of need from the State for 50 more beds

when they successfully close Pascack Valley. And

then what are you going to do, tell them no? The

State says we need 50 more beds in the area and

you're going to have to put them in. There was no

fighting them the last time they added 20 beds.

So, I can say, you know, our ordinances

cannot stop the growth of Valley Hospital from beyond

what we gave them anyway. And we need to do now

something about it.

Thank you.


Next please?

MS. MAILANDER: Zigi Putnins.

THE COURT REPORTER: Sir, can you just

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Z. Putnins - Public Comment


109

spell your name please.

MR. PUTNINS: Z-i-g-i, Putnins

P-u-t-n-i-n-s, 572 Fairway Road.

One of the concerns that has been

raised regarding the Hospital's doubling in size is

the increase in the intensity of use on the area.

The proposed H-Zone ordinance Section

E.6, addresses intensity in terms -- and tries to

limit intensity of use.

Although it says the intent of the

following requirements is to limit the intensity of

uses --

THE COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry, sir.

Can you speak up and a little slower?

(Whereupon, Mr. Putnins hands Court

Reporter a copy of his statement).

MAYOR KILLION: That works.

MR. PUTNINS: And although it says the

intent of the following requirements is to limit the

intensity of uses of within the H-Zone district to

approximately the same level of intensity that

existed in 2010, it doesn't actually define

intensity.

The proposed ordinance as described --

described indicators of a site intensity such as:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Z. Putnins - Public Comment


110

Trip generation; number of physicians, staff and

other employees; number of parking spaces; and actual

parking utilization.

In my view, the only indicator that

counts is the first one, trip generation. Vehicles

count, plain and simple. No wiggle room or fudge

factors or fuzzy math.

The number of staff, we really don't

see what goes on behind the walls of Valley. Of

course the number of people working there, the more

cars you need, but I don't really care if I see -- if

there's one person per car or three people in a car,

but I do care if a car comes and goes.

Number of parking spaces, I don't see

how the number of parking spaces affects intensity.

Of course, the more parking spaces means more cars

can come in.

But I don't really care if a spot has

only one car all day or four different cars; but I do

care how many cars come and go.

Parking utilization, I don't see how

parking utilization affects intensity. Underutilized

parking spots can invite more cars, but I don't care

if all the spots are filled or only half the spots

are filled. But I do care how many cars come and go.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

L. Kender - Public Comment


111

In the event that the Council passes an

ordinance that tries to regulate intensity at Valley,

I would suggest that vehicle metering systems be put

in place at the entrances to count the number of

cars, trucks, ambulances and other vehicles that come

and go, and a monthly assessment be made.

For any month the number of vehicles

exceeds some predetermined number, Valley should be

incentivize to reduce the number in subsequent

months.


MS. MAILANDER: Lisa Kender?

MS. KENDER: My name is Lisa Kender,

K-e-n-d-e-r. I live at 334 Fairway Road.

My husband and I have been residents

and taxpayers of Ridgewood for 17 years at this

address. I have a child at Travell who will be

attending BF.

I attended many of the Planning Board

hearings during the past five years, and I am a

member of Ridgewood Residents for Valley.

I am here tonight to express my support

of the proposed H-Zone Ordinance.

Many of my neighbors are understandably

concerned about: Construction, traffic, noise, dust,

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



112

and the overall safety of the children who walk to

Travell, BF and the high school.

My child will attend BF. And I feel

confident that she will be safe and able to learn

during the construction phase of Valley's

modernization.

I don't believe that Valley con -- that

prior Valley construction projects have impeded

learning or resulted in any accidents.

I believe that well thought out

developer's agreements and monitoring technology can

help Valley and its contractors minimize construction

impacts on both the schools and the neighborhood

while keeping everyone safe.

And by the way, please remember that

everyone, includes Valley staff, doctors, patients

and visitors. And the Hospital will continue to

operate during the construction period.

People have expressed concern that as a

regional hospital, Valley attracts patients from

outside Ridgewood. Well, of course it does. I doubt

that the restaurants and businesses of Ridgewood

could survive if we limited their clientele to only

Ridgewood residents.

As for ongoing patient and staff

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



113

traffic on Linwood, we've heard testimony that

traffic should not significantly increase over

today's levels as the Hospital plan would only add

three new beds.

That said, I personally would welcome

the County improvements to the intersection of

Linwood and Van Dien and to the other intersections

as discussed tonight.

Several people have commented that we

don't need Valley to modernize because if we are

really sick we can go to New York City. Yes, it is

wonderful that we have access to specialists in the

City if we have a rare form of a disease or need a

procedure that Valley can't provide. However, if I

am really sick, I would prefer to be treated right

here in my own backyard by doctors from my community

in a single patient room with access to state of the

art diagnostic equipment.

At several points in my life I have had

to drive over an hour for healthcare. It was

expensive, time consuming and very disruptive to my

life. I do not want to have to do that again, unless

it is absolutely necessary.

In many parts of America, communities

are facing a reduction in healthcare services.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

D. Lipson - Public Comment


114

Specifically, the closing of hospitals that are not

financially viable and a dearth of doctors.

Valley is well managed, financially

strong and provides first rate healthcare. Valley

attracts excellent doctors who are valued members of

our community, that I do not want to lose.

People want Valley to maintain the

status quo while continuing to provide top notch

healthcare. Unfortunately, that's not possible over

the longer term without modernization of the campus.

We, as a community, are going to have

to put up with some inconveniences to help Valley

modernize. The Planning Board worked really hard to

balance the needs of the Hospital with the concerns

of the community. I like the compromise that they

designed.

(Bell Rings.)

MS. KENDER: And I urge the Village

Council to enact the ordinance.

Thank you.

MAYOR KILLION: Thank you. Good

timing.

MS. MAILANDER: David Lipson?

DR. LIPSON: David Lipson, L-i-p-s-o-n,

302 Heights Road.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



115

I've lived in Ridgewood with my family

for 33 years. We've raised two daughters who came

through the Ridgewood public school system. And they

were very well prepared. That's why we came to

Ridgewood. They both wound up in Ivy league schools.

And as some of you in the room

recognize me because I drive a car every year in the

Ridgewood Fourth of July parade. I've had some

illustrious passengers.

I happen to be the Director of the

Department of Plastic Surgery at Valley Hospital and

I have been on-staff ever since we moved into town 33

years ago. In fact my first office was in Ridgewood

for five years, but moved out because they -- it got

too small. We had to find larger quarters. And I'm

now in Fair Lawn.

I have no monetary relationship with

the Hospital. Perhaps in the past I've made some

small charitable contributions, but that's it. I'm

not on their payroll. In fact, all of us physicians

at Valley often give pro bono care in the emergency

room and elsewhere. It's part of our obligation of

being on staff at the Hospital.

During my medical school and residency

training in New York City, I was affiliated at one

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



116

time or another with 17 different hospitals in New

York.

None of them have the professional

level, the care, the compassion and concern for the

community that Valley has shown over the years.

Valley is a very, very special place. And I think

everybody here -- everyone here knows that.

In 1978, when I started practice, I was

on the staff of eight different hospitals including

Valley. Since then, five of those hospitals have

closed for various reasons having to do with

mismanagement, funding, et cetera. By the way, there

are no traffic problems around those five hospitals.

They're all "A" and "B" intersections, I'm sure.

In medicine, one has to keep up with

technology or one will fail. There's no two ways

about it. And Valley, we know the physical plant is

extremely obsolete.

Valley has had a number of previous

renovations while I've been here. And somehow the

neighborhood has survived. And I haven't heard of

any injuries or health hazards to any of the

residents.

I think that Valley's been extremely

careful in all its previous projects. And I would

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

T. Kossoff - Public Comment


117

expect it to be the same. And by the way, I've never

heard Valley Hospital lie.

Regarding real estate values, there's

been -- during the Planning Board, and I've been to

every meeting, in the Planning Board event real

estate values were brought up as a potential problem.

But, number one, I don't know of any

negative impact on real estate values that has been

demonstrated by any of the speakers at any time

during those previous projects. And I think that if

I were a neighbor of the Hospital and the Hospital

were failing because it was obsolete, I think my real

estate values then would suffer.

Thank you.

MAYOR KILLION: Thank you, Doctor.

MS. MAILANDER: Tom Kossoff.

MAYOR KILLION: Tom, three minutes on

the dot. It's not the Council meeting.

MR. KOSSOFF: I've got a little

preface.

MAYOR KILLION: No, three -- three

minutes please, Tom.

MR. KOSSOFF: My name is --

MAYOR KILLION: Come to the Council

meeting on Wednesday, I'll let you talk longer.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



118

MR. KOSSOFF: Tom Kossoff, 46 Heermance

Place, Ridgewood.

THE COURT REPORTER: Can you spell your

last name?

MR. KOSSOFF: Yes, K-o-s-s, like Sam,

o-f-f like Frank.

THE COURT REPORTER: Thank you.

MR. KOSSOFF: That's a long name, so I

get a little extra.

Firstly, before anything, I mean that

great -- that shift change, that 3 o'clock thing, can

someone look in to the perfect storm of 3 o'clock.

Why?

I just throw that out there because

you're -- you're just creating even more problems by

this 3 o'clock. And if there was any concern for the

neighborhood that we're in, with a school, with

everything going on, someone would have had a bright

idea in how many years Valley's been here. I've only

been here since 1993. Let's change that shift hour.

Anyway, what a bombshell of an evening.

When the traffic engineer tonight said right now

Valley is too large for the neighborhood based on the

traffic. What's stranger is that in Valley logic,

the way to solve this problem now is to expand, and

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



119

then that will solve the problem.

And then the quoted skeptical traffic

engineer, who had worked closely with Valley, said

verbatim, "if Valley Hospital is lying to us". I

can't believe that. I guess that's a warning.

I would not even think Valley would be

lying. And this is the traffic engineer.

I'm a little late to the process, but

what I'm hearing tonight is bizarre. I am still

stunned.

Now, I'll prepare -- proceed with my

written comments.

MAYOR KILLION: Okay. Please.

MR. KOSSOFF: I am not a direct

neighbor of Valley Hospital, nor do I have children

any longer in the school system. However, I do

support the neighbors of Valley Hospital. And I

support all the residents who have children at BF

Middle School and Travell now or in the future who

are against the proposed Valley Hospital

Renewal/Expansion.

My position is I am pro expansion of

Valley Hospital, but I'm not pro expansion of Valley

Hospital in Ridgewood. Those two positions are not

contradictory or illogical.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



120

Yes, I accept at face value what Valley

Hospital says they need. However, they have choices

to do that same thing within the current zoning that

allows it to some degree. The rest could be built

and developed elsewhere.

This plan, split planning, may not be

as easy for Valley or economical, but they do have a

choice. The parties that don't have a choice are the

people that are here, the homeowners and the school

children who go to BF Middle School and Travell.

The homes can't be moved. And the

school children can't walk to another middle school.

Everyone agrees that for up to seven years, the

neighbors --

(Bell Rings.)

MR. KOSSOFF: -- and school children

will be living with the annoyance of construction.

This is simply not acceptable quality of life.

Valley has a choice. The neighbors and school

children do not, except to say no.

I am sorry I have to agree for safety

sake, location, location, location --

MAYOR KILLION: Thank you, Tom.

MR. KOSSOFF: -- this is too small and

too dense a neighborhood with homes and the

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

L. Kelty - Public Comment


121

schools --


MR. KOSSOFF: -- please.

Thank you.

MS. MAILANDER: Lawrence Kelty.

THE COURT REPORTER: Sir, can you spell

your first and last name please?

MR. KELTY: Lawrence, L-a-w-r-e-n-c-e,

Kelty K-e-l-t-y. Address is 438 Colonial Road.

I spoke before the Planning Board

twice. And I wanted to thank you for taking the time

over the summer to read those statements.

I now want to add three points that

have come to light since then. They're the concept

of inherently beneficial, the comment for 454 beds

the Hospital would be right sized. Mr. Collins'

comment significant concessions were made by the

Hospital since the beginning of the process.

The first item is the concept of

inherently beneficial and while I will defer to Mr.

Rogers' legal interpretation, I'd like to propose a

common sense interpretation. And I realize legal and

common sense don't always go together.

MAYOR KILLION: Absolutely.

MR. KELTY: The term was mentioned by

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



122

Mr. Brancheau last week, the Planning Board agreed on

it by Ms. Price, and it was the rationale for the

approval by one or more of the Planning Board

members.

I emphatically don't believe this

concept is relevant to this discussion. While I

agree that since hospitals, churches, recycling

centers and even town garbage dumps are inherently

beneficial, but they may not be financially

beneficial, it makes sense to have a law that says we

should reduce some of the requirements they need to

go through to get established.

But once they are established, I don't

believe the concept should be used as a justification

for permitting them to expand beyond the original

size.

I am happy that we have religious

organizations in town. But I don't want the national

cathedral or the Vatican in Van Nests Square.

Inherently beneficial may be grounds

for encouraging the establishment of certain

activities, but should not be used as a justification

for the expansion of those activities.

The second item is Mr. Brancheau's and

Mr. Skorupa's comments about for a 454 bed hospital,

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



123

the proposal is right sized. Many hear the part

about right sized. I hear the qualifier, for a 454

bed hospital.

The Hospital Village sourced patients

are only about 10 percent, so that would imply the

Village only needs a 45 bed hospital to meet its

needs. That is the difference between a local

hospital and a regional hospital.

A local hospital can survive based on

the number of people in the immediate area. A

regional hospital has too many beds to survive

locally, so it must draw patients from throughout the

region.

When did the Village Council decide

that we needed a 454 bed hospital? I argue, it

didn't. It created a size constraint, roughly the

500,000 square feet that would fit on a 15 acre site,

and allow the Hospital to configure the inside.

The Hospital chose to overstuff the

number of beds in the facility.

We heard Mr. Collins say last week that

sometimes one bed has to be removed so that the other

bed can be taken out of the room. That sounds like a

decision was made by the Hospital, not the Village

Council, not the Planning Board, to stuff more beds

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

L. Warren - Public Comment


124

into the space available.

(Bell Rings.)

MAYOR KILLION: Please wrap it up, sir.

MR. KELTY: Lastly, Id like to comment

on Mr. Collins idea that the Hospital has made

significant concessions in the process. Many people

would take exception to that. The Hospital proposal

is at least the same size, if not bigger, since we

started. We have 10 years of construction and noise.

We have a 100 foot building instead of a 60 foot

building. Yes, the Hospital has agreed to make

cosmetic changes, but significant concessions would

be to reduce the floor print, eliminate the

construction noise and prohibit trucks from coming

through the Village. Change shift starting and

ending times to reduce the 3 p.m. congestion at

Linwood and Van Dien.

MAYOR KILLION: Sir, I'm going to have

to ask you to wrap up.

MR. KELTY: Thank you.


MS. MAILANDER: Lee Warren?

MAYOR KILLION: Don't run, take your

time.

MS. WARREN: No, I got to get home.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



125

MAYOR KILLION: I'm sorry.

MS. WARREN: This is cutting into my

sleep time. And you'll find out why I've got bad

news for you.

My name is Lee Warren, 140 Washington

Place. I live across from the George Washington

renewal.


last name please?

MS. WARREN: W-a-r-r-e-n.

The George Washington Middle School

renewal started in July. What people at Valley,

living around Valley need to know is Ridgewood has an

ordinance, I believe it's 20-12 that says

construction may begin on weekdays at 7:30 and must

end by six. On weekends at 9 a.m. and concluding at,

I believe, one or two.

Since July 1st, GW construction has

started between 5:40 and 6:15 every morning. I call

the police. The police come. They stop. The police

drive away. They continue. This is what I hear at

5:40, "beep, beep, beep, beep" from the trucks. They

get around it and say we're not working, it's just

deliveries. Deliveries? This is every single

morning, Monday to Friday.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



126

Certain Saturdays in the summer we --

they were working a little bit on Saturdays. I got

to say last Saturday I woke up with a start, heart

attack, it was so quiet I thought for God's sake

something's wrong. I'm alone on the Earth just

wasn't any construction.

When construction comes into an area,

the traffic patterns -- I don't care what your

studies show -- quadruple. No one is going to let

their little baby walk by when there's construction

going on. I know that. I live across from it. It

is unbelievable the amount increase in that. I would

like the traffic people to come over there and study

what was GW and what it is now? It's quadrupled what

it was.

So I need you to keep that in mind, you

know, and to be honest I was in Valley for two weeks,

a week-and-a-half undiagnosed. I had a roommate. I

enjoyed her to the fullest. And without me there,

she might have gotten in trouble because she was an

elderly lady that people ignored. Fabulous life

story.

I say keep the double rooms. I've

always enjoyed my -- my roommates.

Thank you.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

G. Hautk - Public Comment


127

MAYOR KILLION: Okay. Thank you.

Go get some sleep.

MS. WARREN: I only have five hours

until they start up again.


MS. MAILANDER: Gwenn Hautk?

MAYOR KILLION: I -- okay.

MS. MAILANDER: Gwenn Hautk.

MAYOR KILLION: Gwenn?

MS. MAILANDER: Did I pronounce that

right?

MS. HAUTK: Hi, I'm Gwen Hautk, 217

Fairmount Road.


last name please?

MS. HAUTK: G-w-e-n-n H-a-u-t-k.

I just wanted to speak on behalf of

Valley. I believe that the changes proposed for

Valley are a good idea, that will not only improve

the way the Hospital can serve its patients, but they

will help the Hospital, itself, stay healthy and stay

in a competitive hospital environment.

Also, I trust Audrey Meyers, Megan

Fraser, all the doctors and volunteers that I work

with and all the spokespersons for the Hospital, when

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



128

they tell me that the Hospital will have better

services and healthier surroundings if they modernize

and expand the way they've outlaid it because they're

the experts. And as much as you had to hire

consultants to make -- from the outside and you put

your brains together, you're doing it on the fly.

And these guys are for years and years experts in the

field. And -- and I believe them. I trust Valley

because Valley has never given me reasons not to

trust them. They've never done anything for reasons

but to provide us excellent medical care. And they

have been excellent neighbors.

They have also partnered with me in

many personal ways and with many people I know in the

community. I volunteer for the auxiliary.

In 1992, when I was pregnant with my

third child, I scrubs the stretchers in post-op

rooms. Later I photographed pictures for the

Hospital magazine.

Recently, I shared the Valley wall.

This year I am in charge of all the holiday

decoration for the entire hospital.

I do volunteer to run the gift shop at

the Hospital, and adult volunteer staff at Kurth

Cottage. Valley could afford to hire professionals

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



129

to manage any of these tasks. In fact, it would be

done more effectively if they did.

But our Hospital is very unique in a

way it invites people to help do almost everything

with them.

I've never seen a hospital with so many

volunteers running around. I think Valley is a state

of the art, acute care, regional, mom and pop

hospital.

The Hospital would never cause harm to

come to any of the school children who they so

carefully have protected for so many -- you know,

through all the expansions in the past, and who they

-- they -- they live next to.

The two campuses are actually givers

and caretakers, whose missions are very much the

same.

Audrey Meyers, and expert hospital

consultants and the doctors who work at Valley say

that this renovation is overdue. It is expensive.

But so are all the machines that are in the Hospital.

The new Gamma Knife machine is $7

million alone.

Construction will undoubtedly be an

inconvenience to the neighbors who have to suffer

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25



130

through that. But who amongst us has not suffered

through renovations and construction.

I live in Willard which is currently

under a renovation as well.

But it is even more compelling and

rewarding to realize that these improvements will be

for the greater good.

(Bell Rings.)

MS. HAUTK: -- of so many people who

live in this town and beyond it. And these

renovations will last for another half century at

least.

Thank you.

MAYOR KILLION: And thank you for your

volunteering.

MS. MAILANDER: That's the last name we

have on the list.


Thank you very much for everyone

coming. And it was another good meeting.

We'll see you at the next one. Can I

have a motion please?

DEPUTY MAYOR RICHE: Motion to adjourn.

COUNCILWOMAN WALSH: I'll second it.

MS. MAILANDER: Second.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


131

All in favor?

(Whereupon, all present Council Members

respond in the affirmative.)

MAYOR KILLION: Good night, everyone.

(Whereupon, this matter will be

continuing at a future date. Time noted 9:32

p.m.)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


132

C E R T I F I C A T E

I, LAURA A. CARUCCI, C.C.R., R.P.R., a NotaryPublic of the State of New Jersey, Notary ID. #15855,Certified Court Reporter of the State of New Jersey,and a Registered Professional Reporter, herebycertify that the foregoing is a verbatim record ofthe testimony provided under oath before any court,referee, board, commission or other body created bystatute of the State of New Jersey.

I am not related to the partiesinvolved in this action; I have no financialinterest, nor am I related to an agent of or employedby anyone with a financial interest in the outcome ofthis action.

This transcript complies withregulation 13:43-5.9 of the New Jersey AdministrativeCode.

______________________________LAURA A. CARUCCI, C.C.R., R.P.R.License #XI02050, and Notary Publicof New Jersey #15855, NotaryExpiration Date March 1, 2014

Dated:

laura a. carucci, c.s.r., r.p.r., l.l.c. -...

Documents