Appraisal of 450 Pascack Road, part of town inquiry, is delayed

450 PASCACK ROAD: Mayor Peter Calamari said the “Available” sign was posted Oct. 24, 2020 and it was interpreted as a sign that the developer had given up on developing a senior complex there. Several residents have said they want the land for open space or school expansion.

TOWNSHIP OF WASHINGTON, N.J.—An appraisal of 450 Pascack Road—the key to the township’s ultimate offer on the property for future acquisition—had to be delayed due to the appraiser’s lack of access to the property, sources familiar with the matter told Pascack Press.

While lack of access may have delayed the appraisal, Township Attorney Kenneth Poller said an appraisal was rescheduled for Friday, March 19. The township approved a $2,500 bill to pay for the appraisal on Feb. 16.

Previously, Poller told Pascack Press that the appraiser hired can still do the appraisal without gaining access to the land through publicly available documents, maps, and surveys.

Sources told Pascack Press that when the appraisal is provided to the mayor and council, officials will discuss the appraisal in closed session and then likely make a preliminary offer to purchase the 3.2-acre mostly wooded property, sandwiched between Ridgewood Boulevard East, Memorial Field and Washington Elementary School.

It was not clear where funds to purchase the tract may come from, although it appeared no prior or current federal/state grant funds had been put aside for such purpose and no grants funds were anticipated.

Three residents called the March 15 council meeting to ask about the appraisal and whether grant funding might be used. Cleveland Avenue resident William Ferrara wondered if Green Acres funds could be used to acquire 450 Pascack Road and if so, must it stay natural or could the property be used for other purposes.

Joseph Scalia said he previously requested the municipal grant writer appear at a council meeting to discuss what funds might be available to help purchase 450 Pascack Road, as well as funds for other projects. He said residents “don’t want to raise taxes” to purchase 450 Pascack Road.

The property, which features a few run-down structures, including an 1,800-square-foot home, mostly consists of a forested landscape populated by 700-plus trees, including many large mature trees vital to the town’s tree canopy.

Since a developer, Nick Tsapatsaris Associates, owner of Lakos Construction Inc., proposed and withdrew plans for a 48-unit senior complex on the site last summer, nearby residents have mobilized and been pressing the council to preserve the property or rezone it to prevent any future development.

A letter endorsed by three nearby homeowners in October and sent by an attorney to council recommended eminent domain to acquire the tract as well as rezoning as key tools to preserve the property.

Several weeks ago Poller told this newspaper that “We believe we have more than enough justification for condemnation” but that the township would open negotiations with the property owner in good faith to try to reach a fair settlement.

One of the owners, Robert Morris, meanwhile, said he was hoping that the elongated sliver of tree-dense land could provide a nest egg for himself and his heirs, as well as offer something back to the township.

Morris said his family has owned the tract for 70-plus years, during which his family has been a good neighbor in town, letting school children take shortcuts through the forested buffer and noting his dad allowed the town to secure a sanitary sewer easement years ago.

He told Pascack Press a few months ago that the long forested landscape provides much shade and privacy to neighbors on both sides, who prefer having trees and not another noisy street behind their homes.

Morris said that his family has maintained the land, which amounts to one of the last remaining woodlands in town, for decades and has tried to work with town officials before on a land sale.

However, that proposed deal fell through. Morris said he delayed home repairs while waiting for local officials to purchase the property. That purchase never occurred and the town missed its chance, he previously said.

Following a couple public records requests, Pascack Press learned that the appraisal ordered by Township officials cost $2,500—not $5,500 as indicated on previous bills approved by the council.

Recently, the township attorney publicly stated that the hired appraiser, McNerney & Associates, was hired in case there’s a need to testify at any future legal proceedings.

The firm says it charges $150 per hour for testifying in court.

In a March 4 letter sent to mayor and council, Diane Ferrara, a member of a residents’ group hoping to preserve 450 Pascack Road, repeatedly emphasized that they want assurances from the town that the property appraisal will not be based on “any speculative interests which Mr. Tsapatsaris may have in developing that property irrespective of those constraints,” she wrote.

The constraints cited are the property’s current “AA” zoning that allows single-family homes on half-acre sites, environmental constraints, and zoning restrictions that the group contends makes the site “unbuildable.”

Ferrara often speaks out for STOP, or Stop Township Overdevelopment Projects, and advocates for efforts to preserve the 450 Pascack Road tract.

Ferrara and nearby homeowners contacted Pascack Press last summer to raise concerns about what they viewed as a high-density proposal on a site not appropriate for such development.

Within about a month, Tsapatsaris withdrew his Zoning Board application for a 48-unit senior complex on the site.
About a dozen nearby homeowners take turns regularly calling council meetings to prod council members to preserve or acquire the land before another development application appears.

Ferrara’s March 4 letter thanked attorney Poller for clarifying the appraisal’s constraints and “that the appraisal is being conducted with a view of providing expert testimony in this matter, and as a basis for a future decision by the Mayor and Council concerning the property, hence the need for a more comprehensive appraisal suited to these objectives.”

She added, “Our concerns about the appraisal were not that the owner—Mr. Morris—would have met with the appraiser; but that Mr. Tsapatsaris—who does not own the property and is only a developer with a contingency relationship with the owner, and who has also put the property up for sale for $2.1 million after proposing an absurdly ill-suited, high density project on that property—indicated that his agent is the one working with the appraisal firm retained by the Township.”

She said, “This raises the appearance at least of a conflict of interest, and we would like to be assured that the developer will not unduly influence an appraisal that should be based solely on existing zoning law and lot constraints, and not on any speculative interests which Mr. Tsapatsaris may have in developing that property irrespective of those constraints.”

Tsapatsaris declined to comment for this article. Poller and Morris did not reply to our requests for comment by press time.