Posted on

Reader says building two simple parking decks instead of one big garage makes tremendous sense

Employee parking lots near Town Garage

The best thing this Council can do is to fix the parking distribution problem stated and recommended in their own commissioned report (Walker and Maser). Before changing of the guard (May election) build smaller, low-level parking decks, in opposite corners of the Central Business District. D I S T R I B U T I O N !!!!! Clearly, one ginormous garage at Hudson is only to appease personal interests. Follow the professionals recommendations/reports.

The notion of building two simple parking decks instead of one big garage makes tremendous sense. It would offer distributed parking throughout the CBD and it has been suggested before and rejected by previous VC’s. The problem with a “distributed” solution is that the economics do not work. Much of the cost of a garage goes into site development costs for footings, , foundations etc. The first level is the most expensive to build and each successive level is less costly.Thus, maximum economic efficiency is achievedby building a single multi-level structure.

10 thoughts on “Reader says building two simple parking decks instead of one big garage makes tremendous sense

  1. I have written to the council about this idea. And spoken to individual members. They ignore me. Please mention at town council meeting.

  2. if you have an email you would like to share the ridgewood blog would publish it [email protected]

  3. Less money initially spent on a single gigantic parking deck (the top two decks of which would never end up being used) would end up being a big waste of money long term and an eyesore to boot. More money initially spent on two lower-slung parking decks would result in far greater usage efficiency in the out years and therefore a better financial result overall.

  4. Anything that makes sense is not going to happen. Everyone has an agenda on this freaking garage and none of these agendas have anything to do with what is right. Mike and Susan want to get reelected so all of their actions have to do with looking good in May. Ramon wants to sell housing in the CBD so he needs the garage. Bernie, not sure what she wants. Voigt just wants to get back at anyone who ever looked crosseyed at him and most of those people are against the garage…..so he will support the garage even though he was completely opposed to it. What a cesspool. And it’s gonna cost us, big time.

  5. I agree with the comment by 9:43 that two smaller well placed single level parking decks wouild result in greater usage efficiency. The cost per space to build would be somewaht higher but this would be more than offset by increased usage. Good thinking 9:43..

  6. PHOTO SAYS:

    Pavement is a shambles…a crime and fall hazard…aside a haz mat Site.Leadership Zero.

  7. I agree 100 percent with the original post. I too have supported this and it was Pat Mancuso who first proposed this idea. Maybe with enough public support it can be a reality.

  8. The idea of 2 separate parking decks make much more sense than one garage alone. However, I assume you want to put the second one on the highly contaminated lot on Franklin. The developers who bought that lot planning to jack up the price when Ridgewood decided to build there will be very happy. I still don’t understand why the Village can’t force them to clean it up instead of rolling over like a dog, buying it, and then being forced to spend a fortune remediating the underground problems. When you want to sell a house with an oil tank, it is the owner not the buyer who must pay for its removal. Why let the buyers get by with knowingly buying a property that they knew needed much work so they could increase the price and then sell it, with all its problems, to Ridgewood.

  9. The Franklin Street “Village Garage” lot was publicly targeted by the Village Council for condemnation as “blighted” as part of a redevelopment plan. The Village would rely on the decision in Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005), a case decided by the U. S. Supreme Court involving the use of eminent domain to transfer land from one private owner to another private owner to further economic development. Construction of a municipal parking garage would then follow. $15 million in bond money was raised for that purpose, but when Village residents objected to the heavy-handed use of the eminent domain power, the plan was dropped and the money spent on other priorities. The current owners bought the property at that time at a relatively low price expecting to make a tidy profit in the near future. Obviously that didn’t exactly pan out for them.

  10. Was a garage promised to the owner of fish?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.