DPW planned for Charlie Brown’s

Council introduces $1.35M appropriation; public hearing March 21

The former Charlie Brown's steakhouse, 95 Linwood Ave., Township of Washington. (Google Street View)

TOWNSHIP OF WASHINGTON—Mayor Peter Calamari confirmed at the March 7 Township Council meeting that a new Department of Public Works headquarters will be constructed at 95 Linwood Ave., the 1.45-acre former home of a Charlie Brown’s Fresh Grill, which the township plans to purchase soon.

Calamari said the township would purchase the property for $1.35 million, the same amount  Apple Montessori Schools put in for the property. 

Apple Montessori Schools evidently thought it had a deal with the seller sufficient to undertake tens of thousands of dollars on due diligence efforts. Nevertheless it withdrew its offer after the township demanded to purchase the property instead — under threat of “the condemnation route.”

On March 7, council introduced a $1.35 million appropriation,  including a down payment of $65,000, with $1.285 million authorized in 40-year bonds or notes. Ordinance 22-07 comes up for vote March 21.

Council President Desserie Morgan was absent. Members voting for were VP Stacey Feeney, Tom Sears, Steve Cascio, and Daisy Velez.

Calamari has said DPW building plans have been in the works among the administration and senior DPW officials. No concepts, renderings, or designs have yet been presented to the public, although Calamari said that may occur on March 21.

The former Department of Municipal Facilities-turned- Department of Public Works lost its home at the Municipal Complex after the site was found to be contaminated, dating to toxins leaching since the 1970s and 1980s. 

The facility, which was part of a list of town properties found to be in disrepair by the men and women who work there, as far back as the administration of the late Janet Sobkowicz, was razed in 2021, and its soil remediated under an NJ DEP extension.

Last June, the township approved a $193,541 professional services contract with Lisko to remediate the DPW site that was awarded without competitive bid.  

Officials said at the time that a 2019 estimate to replace the DPW facility was approximately $1.5 million, with part of the capital cost to come from the sale of a school building in Westwood. (See “Decades on, Township of Washington Council clearer on finances,” Pascack Press, July 13, 2018.)

Calamari’s March 7 comments come after nearly two months of public speculation that the DPW would be moving to 95 Linwood Ave. 

The township council also recently approved $800,000 for the private 6.5-acre Washington Township Swim and Recreation Club, on Ridgewood Boulevard North (a land survey and environmental assessment are under way), for a purpose Calamari said is not necessarily for a swim club.

The town also is gunning for 450 Pascack Road, a mostly wooded 3.2-acre tract adjacent to Memorial Field, for a reported $430,000, also for purposes yet not disclosed.

According to emails and records provided to Pascack Press, the township has been involved with negotiations to purchase the property since early this year, although Calamari asserted he expressed interest in the site last summer and alerted council members to its availability as a potential DPW location.

Calamari said that local officials cannot reveal their negotiation strategies, minimum/maximum price points for negotiations, and alternatives as this “would be detrimental to the taxpayers and the township’s interests in achieving the best outcome for the township.”

Calamari said on March 7, “With the introduction of the bond ordinance for the purchase of 95 Linwood Ave. … the final chapter of a new DPW facility is being written.”

He said the search for a new DPW site “has been an ongoing process since I took office.”  

He said the DPW will be moving from “cramped quarters” behind the municipal complex to a site “with access to a major roadway and space to provide expanded DPW services to township residents now and for generations to come.”

The mayor said the relocation of would provide more parking spaces for seniors using the senior center at town hall and residents who visit the municipal building. 

He said, “This location is ideal for its intended use.”

He said the bond ordinance was one of the parts required to purchase 95 Linwood Ave. He cited closed sessions allowed in the Open Public Meetings Act that allow public officials “to openly discuss these matters in a non-public setting.” He said this “worked out very well” for the township with 95 Linwood Ave. and prior transactions.

“By conducting the process as we did we have avoided condemnation, have an amicable sale with the seller, and have put the relocation of our new DPW facility on the fast track for the benefit of township residents.”

He said he had instructed the DPW facility architect, Arcari & Iovino, of Little Ferry, to prepare a presentation “of what the floor plan and the building will look like for the next meeting, when the public will have input on the bond ordinance.”

Pascack Press first reported the township’s offer after Erica Amon, an Apple Montessori real estate development official, called into the Jan. 13 special public meeting to question the council on its intentions. (See “Hardball $1.3M bid on Charlie Brown’s property,” Pascack Press, Jan. 31, 2022.”

Township attorney Kenneth Poller’s language in an email to the seller’s representative, urging a voluntary sale against the threat of “the condemnation route,” alarmed residents, one of whom pressed him at a subsequent meeting on whether the town would take such a stance with residents.

Poller said no. That said, the town did execute an easement condemnation on SZ Realty as part of a pending county overhaul of the Pascack–Washington intersection.

While Calamari said the owners of the former Charlie Brown’s property said the site was available for leasing and not sale when he initially approached them, he said he would keep in touch. 

At that point, in July 2021, he said the board conducted an appraisal that found the site valued at $1.3 million. 

It was unclear why the property owner was already in negotiations with Apple Montessori Schools if the township had expressed interest. However, Amon told Pascack Press that Montessori  had already spent tens of thousands of dollars on due diligence reports before the township stepped in with its offer.

Amon did not answer our invitation to comment on the bond ordinance introduction by press time.  

Calamari did not address the timing of the township’s offer nor explain its threat of condemnation, which knowledgeable  sources told Pascack Press effectively ended the Montessori acquisition.

In February Pascack  Press reached out to 17 neighbors within 200 feet of the  property, seeking their views on a possible sale, including then-hypothetically to the town for a new DPW.

Public records show there are eight property owners adjacent in the township and nine in Paramus. 

Church lease still raises questions

The Township Council, and Calamari, have been under pressure since early 2021 to locate parking spaces for heavy DPW vehicles displaced by the DPW’s demolition and required soil remediation work at its former site behind the municipal building. 

At the 2021 Greater Pascack Valley Chamber of Commerce mayors’ breakfast, a public forum on hot-button issues,  Calamari put out a general appeal among his peers for parking spaces for the township’s DPW vehicles.

Those efforts were not successful, nor were efforts to locate vehicle parking elsewhere in town at borough-owned properties at Sherry Field and near the Doghouse Saloon.

Township officials eventually leased 35 parking spaces at Our Lady of Good Counsel Church for two years at $60,600. Other seasonal DPW equipment has been temporarily stored in an adjacent bank parking lot for free.

On March 7, former Councilman Michael Ullman asked whether a variance was required for the church to allow DPW vehicles to park on its land. 

He also questioned the revenues being generated by the church given that it is tax-exempt organization. 

Poller said a variance was not needed because the township is not a commercial entity and said questions about revenues and tax status should be directed to the tax assessor.