Suit Targets Vote Paving Way for Valley Expansion

A lawsuit has been filed challenging the expansion of the Ridgewood Master Plan, which allowed for the proposed Valley Hospital expansion to proceed.

The Concerned Citizens of Ridgewood filed suit in Superior Court Monday against the village Planning Board and Valley Hospital, contending that the "H-Zone" amendment to the Master Plan is unlawful and contradicts the objectives of the plan.

Paul Gould, the spokesman for CRR, said in a statement that the Master Plan amendment—approved June 21 by the board amid protests—is "simply wrong for Ridgewood, and the residents are asking the court to reverse the decision.

"Valley has tried to circumvent the criteria that has been in the village for so long," he said.

"The hospital in its history has been overreaching. Nobody trusts the hospital to do what's right. They exploit every opportunity," Gould said.

Valley spokesperson Megan Fraser issued a statement in response to the suit: "It is disappointing that a small group of people, largely those who live in the hospital's neighborhood, are attacking the village and its Planning Board to delay a project that will serve so many people of our region for years to come," she wrote. 

"After almost four years and 35 meetings that included exhaustive testimony, investigation and disclosure, the suit is an unfortunate step in the wrong direction."

Village Manager Ken Gabbert could not comment on the specific legal ramifications, but said typically the village and Planning Board will have 35 days to respond to allegations. He also said the village had not been served with the suit.

The lawsuit also may delay Village Council action; Mayor Keith Killion said the council attorney, Matt Rogers, will be reviewing the merits of the case and advising the village on the matter.

The "H-Zone" amendment would make significant changes to the size of the 15.4-acre Valley Hospital facility if approved by Village Council. Hospital mass would double to nearly 1.2 million square feet by the erection (and demolition) of several buildings (including a five-story structure), and setbacks would increase along borders.

The CRR had a 45-day window to file from the date the decision was published, Gould said, which was the reason for the lawsuit's timing, though the legal team spent significant time in preparing a case. CRR has retained attorney John L. Lamb of Montvale-based Beattie Padovano, to represent the opposition group; Lamb specializes in New Jersey municipal land use law.

The lawsuit alleges that there were 17 separate counts of wrongdoing by the planning board, among them: the board's notices was defective and insufficient; a public notice of the concept plan was not provided to adjacent property owners; the board failed to publish notice of the special meetings in two newspapers required under the Open Public Meetings Act; attendance was purposely limited by village officials; the former mayor, David Pfund, had a conflict of interest (though the board found that to be untrue); the vice chairman also had a conflict and/or the appearance of impropriety (though he recused himself), as did others on the board; the zoning changes are unlawful, as they are "spot zoning" and "spot planning;" proposed multiple expansions "over 20 years" are invalid; among other charges.

The legal action charges that Pfund, an attorney, indicated that one of his representative clients was Valley Hospital, and that the information indicating such on his law firm website was taken down.

The suit also states that Pfund's parents had close connections to Valley, notably that his father was a hospital trustee, and that's a violation of his involvement.

The suit further states that Vice Chair Albert Pucciarelli had a conflict of interest, which Pucciarelli told Patch was true via telephone on Tuesday. "That's why I recused myself," he said. Gould declined to comment on why Pucciarelli is mentioned; though he said the law in general concerns overall context, not just the final outcome.

In past statements, the CRR have said they're concerned about the quality of life in Ridgewood should the expansion, dubbed the "Valley Renewal Project," be authorized. They cite a concern with health issues from asbestos, long-term construction near schools, declining property values as a result of expansion, among others as opposition points.

"If expansion goes ahead, if you look at other places where these types of things have taken place... property values around the area will go down," Gould said.

He also alleged that the additional traffic along the corridor will also negatively impact property values and that "the tax base will go down forever."

The Planning Board approved the amendment to expand the hospital by a 6-1 vote at a contentious hearing in June, which left hundreds of citizens unable to attend and resulted in the arrest of one man. 

Board members listed various reasons for supporting that the amendment be reviewed by the village council, though the Planning Board has recommend that a comprehensive environmental study be done, as well.

If the council is able to review the matter and disagrees entirely or in part with the amendment, it must declare what is "inconsistent with the Master Plan and spell out why it's inconsistent," according to Rogers. Council's justifications for objection must be "based on sound principle of zoning and planning," he said.

Village Council must eventually decide on an ordinance either approving, rejecting, or rejecting in part the Master Plan amendment.

Gould said he's confident the CRR has a good shot at winning this battle in court. "Unlike Valley, who currently has hundreds of millions of dollars in cash on hand to spend from profits made from the patients and their insurance companies, this lawsuit is being paid for by residents from their own pockets," he stated.

"We would not proceed if there was not a good chance of success."