photo by Saurabh Dani
To My Ridgewood Neighbors:
I was not initially opposed to the proposed parking structure on Hudson Street in the center of Ridgewood but after seeing the renderings, I am entirely against it because of its enormous size and unfitting design. The residents that are vocally opposed to this structure know that it will destroy the character of Ridgewood. I am personally opposed to it because it will destroy the character of my neighborhood.
I live a couple blocks away with my wife and three children, and walk by this lot at least twice a day. My kids walk by it going to and from school. And my neighbors who have been here even longer than we have pass by it regularly. I have lived on South Broad Street for the past 16 years and have actually been looking forward to development that will improve the area. This will only make it worse.
Good architectural design makes an effort to work with the style of a neighborhood. This does not. If this structure has to be four or five above-grade stories then the right aesthetic approach would be to match the height of the apartments across the street, two-stories high, along South Broad Street and Hudson Street, and then use a set-back of 20 feet so that you could continue up from there without it being an eyesore. That way you get your height and space required but you do not create an ominous structure.
One rule of thumb is to never build something taller than the most attractive buildings. The three-story buildings with spires on the corner of South Broad Street and East Ridgewood Avenue are good examples of our town’s beautiful downtown architecture. To build a massive parking garage just next to them would dominate the center and detract from them. The idea of making a parking garage the most noticeable building in a town’s center is a cultural recipe for disaster.
Ironically the details of the roof on the corner of South Broad Street and Hudson Street, which is the only part of the structure with any kind of actual design sensibility, will not be seen by anyone on the street level because it is too high. And the only time this part of the street and the residences will get daylight is the late afternoon because it is south west of those apartment windows.
I heard that this structure is not supposed to significantly increase the traffic on my street. How is that even plausible? It’s a parking structure! It can only bring more cars…that’s the point. When the New York Sports Club moved in several years ago I was excited that the abandoned car showroom was being turned into something new and bringing life to a fairly run down street.
The problem is that not only did it bring a significant amount more of traffic but it brought a different kind of traffic. The traffic that existed prior to the Sports Club consisted of people who used South Broad Street as a straight shot to Glen Rock. They drove fast and polluted the street as people in cars do but they were also focused on getting in or out of town. The new traffic was a very different scene. People drive faster and a bit more recklessly because they are speeding to or from the gym, while texting on their phones, and they are making turns across busy pedestrian paths without checking.
I anticipate this extra traffic the parking garage will bring will be of this caliber: people hurrying to the structure because it will take extra time to park there than pulling into a spot on the street so they can go shopping and meet someone at a restaurant. On the way there they will be texting that they are arriving or leaving. While the developers are only responsible for the accidents that happen on their property, I worry about the accidents that will happen in the few block radius around their facility, as should the politicians in Ridgewood and the residences of my neighborhood as well as the residents of Ridgewood and people visiting our town.
I think we are at a point where we have to decide (as did the planners of many cities around the United States) whether we want Ridgewood to be a town that favors cars or people.
If I were mandated to build a parking garage in the center, the most natural place to put it would be actually down at the corner of East Ridgewood Avenue and Maple. That area is developed more for higher volume traffic and already has a large surface-level parking lot that could be built up in a way that keep all the stores intact, and already has a large ground-level underpass on Maple Street. But I would actually be in favor of less traffic in general.
The only people clamoring for the parking garage are shop owners who think their profits will magically double once the garage is built. At the town meeting I attended, I heard a senior lady propose an idea that I think would work very well. That is, why not close down some of the streets for cars and make them pedestrian ways. It worked well in Montclair, and it has had an amazing effect on midtown Manhattan. If we leave South Broad Street/North Broad Street open, but closed East Ridgewood Avenue from the Broad Streets to the Post Office and turned that into a pedestrian way and expanded the outdoor seating for restaurants, you would increase the tourist appeal of the center and it would only mean closing down part of one street. If you have been to the tree lighting in Ridgewood and have experienced these car-free nights of East Ridgewood Avenue, then you would see how popular it could be.
Some of my concerns may be a little too close to home but in my nearly fifty years of living in the United States and Europe I have taken note of projects that improve and detract from the character of towns and cities. I have lived in beautiful places including Santa Barbara and Prague. I would include Ridgewood as a beautiful place to live. These are places people want to go to in order to get away from strip malls, busy roads, and generic housing because by being in a unique place, people feel special.
Ridgewood has charm and character but that is in jeopardy with bad planning. The problem with parking garages is that even the best of them have the feeling of an incomplete building, or worse, an abandoned building because of their open structure, which makes them appear gutted. What makes the streets of Ridgewood so pleasant to walk down is that almost all of the buildings have storefront access. The proposed parking lot would just be a lifeless block of concrete. I would not be opposed to a parking garage with special details that would appeal to the public such as a public access green roof and storefront shops/galleries. They would not have to be big spaces, just something to continue the pedestrian window-shopping feel for the streets.
I have also been to and lived in many places that are not nice and one thing they have in common is a corruption of character. Corruption is a good word because it usually starts with individuals who do not have the best interests of the people. That may be a developer who does not have any interest in a region other than profit, or are simply evil people – like a bad government. An example of this is a small city I lived in, in the north of the Czech Republic. It had been bombed out in WWII and unlike cities such as Warsaw in Poland, which restored their historic downtown, the communists built a big concrete structure in their town center, which dominated the historic buildings that were saved. The townspeople had opposed it from the start even though the communist government assured them that they knew best. It was nicknamed “the bathtub” because it looked like the side of an old bathtub. After communism they tore it down.
So, when the style of a town center is lost to a new, ugly building like the proposed parking structure it becomes a symbol of wrongdoing and mistakes and can only be fixed by tearing it down.
Drew Martin
209 South Broad Street
To learn more about Drew Martin: https://www.northjersey.com/
Go Drew! Thank you, thank you, thank you
Drew should read parts of this at council meeting before the vote on the parking garage. Thank you , Drew.
Excellent post!!!
Excellent observation ! And, it’s not even needed…
One wonders how Art Wrubel will describe this monstrosity when the time comes to dedicate a page to it in the Village calendar. “A splendid example of modern SNAFU-BOHICA architecture with flying buttresses and arched pilasters one can almost reach out and touch WHEN STANDING ON THE SIDEWALK ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET.”
In a category of its own, Block Busting neo dynosaurian urban ghetto making…Constructed in the Tone Deaf and classless period by the former merchants and their henchmen on the Village Council in 2017 despite wide objections from most of the tax paying citizens.Motions to tear it down not to exceed 45 M to replicate the north cafe district passed in the 2036 budget.closing the sordid chapter of the 2016 renegade council.
I believe he has read it before to the council…they do not care. It actually can’t be big enough for them…they voted for the encroachment and version A. The only, and I mean the only, people those three care about are builders, restaurant owners, and the NJ democratic party bosses. If that poor owner of Mango Jam or whatever else small business thinks they actually care, they just aren’t paying attention. Most of those small businesses will be out of business by the time construction is finished.
This what he said at a resent Council meeting 11:38
“Art Wrubel, a former Planning Board member, gave his opinion on the physical impact of the developments, which he said would not have a major impact on the CBD due to the height limits.”
He’s pretty sanguine about Democratic Party priorities in Bergen County but you should have heard old Art light into his favorite punching bag, Scott Garrett, a couple of years ago when a stoppage in the parade placed the helpless congressman at a dead stop not fifteen feet away from Ridgewood’s architect laureate for a grueling five minutes of ad hominem abuse. He should try out for BLM, they would hire him to be a professional Trump Event Disruptor in about five minutes once they hear him in full-throated partisan song.
Art Wrubel what a hack. He gave shop owners such a hard time when they want to move in or change something making them appear in front HPC numerous times. He ran that committee like a dictatorship. All for the preservation of historic Ridhgewood. Then he said the follow at a council meet. Our Mayor must have been pulling his strings.
Art Wrubel, 79 Ridge Road, a former member of the Planning Board and Historic Preservation Commission and a professional planner, stated that the business district started out as one block of commercial development that expanded over the years. He pointed out that this proposal consists of three developments that are definite, and one proposed development. Mr. Wrubel said that the developments will be scattered throughout the downtown and, based on his experience, will not have a major impact on the Village. The Village has ordinances addressing height, and several years from now, individuals will not realize the impact of these structures unless they are standing next to them. Mr. Wrubel observed that three of the four sites were previously automobile showrooms, which have been closed, and he categorized them as derelict. New buildings will be two stories high at most, and constructed out of aluminum. The physical and visual impact of the proposed building will not overwhelm this Village. The impacts on parking, water, fire, schools, and open space have been studied. A traffic study was funded by the developer through an escrow account, and the Village hired their own traffic expert to conduct the study. Mr. Wrubel concluded that he hasn’t heard any convincing argument as to the negative impacts of the proposal, and the potential for good architecture could actually enhance the downtown.
The Tito’s paint color got so much freaking attention, and the garage sails through. Historic Preservation? Historic DESTRUCTION
I really like the pedestrian street idea. But doesnt taking away those parking spots only enhance the need for a garage? With the garage a block from the pedestrian zone it would be ideal. People could park and then have a nice walking downtown.
We seem to now have a two front onslaught of development plans and issues..each seemingly different but no less important to play a steering role in both.
Didn’t an overwhelming majority of Ridgewood Residents vote in favor of a garage?
To say the council only cares about builders, restaurant owners and party bosses is a lie – they are listening to the majority of us who are in favor or a garage.
12.03. Welcome back from Venus..so much changed in the meantime..garage that exploded onto the Streetscape..referendums..outing of the councils bate and switch etc
That referendum had no size or design attached….I would argue the majority favor a smaller garage (e, or something similar) and do not favor creating the tallest post WWII building in the form of a garage. Compromise is not a word they actually use in practice bc too many promises have been made to others.
12:03am we will see that in May referendum for BCIA.