Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Ridgewood council introduces sidewalk‑display ordinance after heated debate over racks of clothing
Loading...
Summary
After hours of discussion and public comment from merchants, the village council voted to introduce a revised sidewalk‑display ordinance (ordinance 40‑96) that allows regulated storefront displays but explicitly prohibits racks of clothing; draft will go to Planning Board and Historic Preservation Commission with a May 13 hearing.
The Ridgewood Village Council voted to introduce a new sidewalk‑display ordinance on first reading Tuesday after an extended workshop and special public meeting in which merchants and preservationists clashed over whether displays should be used for placemaking or for selling merchandise.
The draft ordinance, introduced as amended by Matt Rogers and carried by a majority of the council, would permit one three‑dimensional display per storefront (no larger than 5 feet high by 6 feet wide, parallel to the building), require displays to be weighted or ballasted for safety, and allow merchants to show samples or examples designed to bring customers into the store. The council narrowed a key prohibition to a single item: “racks of clothing are prohibited,” Mayor Vagianos said when the amendment was read into the record.
Merchants who testified urged flexibility. Gina John, who identified herself as the owner of a downtown jewelry shop, said foot traffic has dropped and that displays and small outdoor sales can help keep businesses afloat: “There are some real underlying issues that are deliberately killing businesses,” she told the council. Retail advocates and the Ridgewood Business Alliance expressed concern about parking and the need for a liaison or merchant committee to advise the council.
Historic‑preservation advocates and some council members warned against permitting merchandise sales that could make the downtown look “chintzy” and create enforcement headaches. Evan (council member) said the Historic Preservation Commission’s feedback favored placemaking over merchandise for sale and worried enforcement would become subjective. Pam (council member) and other members pressed for language that leaves facade art and long‑term architectural elements to HPC review rather than the display ordinance.
Councilmembers reached working consensus on several points: the ordinance will not charge a permit fee; displays must be removed or brought inside when a shop closes unless the item is a permanent, permitted feature; and the prohibition will explicitly call out racks of clothing while allowing tasteful tables, shelving or single racks in limited circumstances. Staff will circulate a clean draft to the Chamber of Commerce, the Central Business District guild, the Planning Board and HPC for comment ahead of the May 13 public hearing.
The ordinance was introduced as amended; it will return for further public review and a second reading once the Planning Board and HPC issue recommendations.
