Posted on

Ridgewood Resident Says “Parking Garage” down side deeply out weighs the limited upside

bill mccandless

January 11,2017

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ, at last nights Village Council meeting during the comment period resident Bill McCandless summed up the economic realities of the Hudson Street Parking garage .

Speaking to the council McCandless said, “The Village taxpayers face a new reality this year one that the fiscal state of the Village has not faced before , the decision and progress around certain issues will need to be reexamined coming into this year and we are going to need to clear the decks on a few things and reexamine how we prioritize things first and foremost are we burdening the taxpayers with new fees and taxes and if we are is the return on that investment greater than those taxes and fees and can we prove it.”

“One place we can not and have not been able to prove this is the proposal for the garage , the case against the garage is strong and is powered by undisputable faces that nee to be considered before plunging the village taxpayers deeper into debt and creating more congestion on are already over crowed and over stressed roads .”

“A recent study done the garage proposal show there is more than enough parking capacity in the CBD and what we have is not utilized , there is no fiscal plan for the garage pays for it self or through increased CBD tax receipts , it is a net loss.”

“Traffic at every intersection in and around the CBD on both sides of the tracks will be worse with the addition.

The intersections in and around the CBD are already over capacity and many are blow standard for the existing traffic .

There is no logical argument for the garage , the only thing the garage will add is tax payer debt and high fees for every shopper dinner and more congestion across an already congested set of intersections .

why add what we don’t need ,cant afford and creates worse conditions on any one who wants to come to Ridgewood.

I’ve listen read and consumed all sides and see no compelling case supported by facts , case studies or logic that benefits the public good.

The coming revolutions of autonomous cars and vehicles this reality is closer than the public realizes , less than 10years away when the need for parking capacity will be hugely impacted .

How does more debt and congestion serve the village , the down side deeply out weighs the limited upside for a few more spots in the most congested part of the Village ?”

Then McCandless proposed the following simple solution :

“lease open new lots were possible
stop the meter feeding by employees
and plan for the driverless future “

18 thoughts on “Ridgewood Resident Says “Parking Garage” down side deeply out weighs the limited upside

  1. Agree, agree, and AGREE

  2. 1. Employees and owners continue to park in the CBD. (take a look at the lot reserved for them, it’s virtually empty)
    2. Residents and shoppers do not want increased meter times and rates to pay for a garage. (tried before and failed)

    Fix these 2 problems and then come talk to me about a garage.

  3. The Centralized Valet Parking Program pilot was a TOTAL FAILURE – Confirming that there is no need for a parking infrastructure above and beyond what the Village already has in place. Mr. McCandless is spot on.

  4. Totally agree, no need for a garage.

  5. Let’s hope he picked up his council election petition while he was at Village Hall! Run Bill Run!!

  6. All talk of a smaller garage must cease until it is shown that it is needed. and that it will fully pay it’s cost. As I see it, the builders who are increasing homes in that area will lease parking to remedy that being a major flaw in their development plans. This will obviously be a rent reduced especially for them. The business men in this town do not support the garage and will not give parking validations to their customers. They also absolutely refuse to be responsible in relation to employee parking as close to their work sites as possible. Please do not commit Ridgewood to another loss loser without finding the real (non-existant) use and need.

  7. I have folowed this debate for some while. I have heard person after person get up and say “we need to solve the parking problem – – we need a garage.” But, i have still never heard anyone explain what the “parking problem” is or why a garage is going to solve that problem.

    Yes, one can make the argument that there is a “shortage” of spaces if you view it from the perspective of whether all one hundred patrons of Roots or Greek to Me can park in front of the restaurant at the same time – – they can’t. But if those establishments want to park a hundred cars, they should move out to the highway where they can purchase a parking lot to go with their business. They shouldn’t ask the tax payers to buy one for them.

  8. 4:21 p.m. The garage is supposed to help commuters to NYC find parking.

    What happened to the idea of renting the lot behind the movie theater?

  9. Are you kidding me 4:21 thats to cheap and simple also its to far for the commuters to walk.

  10. And yet 4/5 of the council are dead-set determined to build this thing. It’s a boondoggle straight out of the Aronsohn era, quite literally since it was his project, to please the construction unions who support his political efforts financially. To build it now at any size would give him one more victory and be a huge loss for the increasingly desperate village taxpayer. NO NO NO.

  11. Before another step is taken in relation to building a garage, a need is yet to be proven. Sure the developers and store owners think it is a great idea that the village is going to add to the Village’s tax base to provide a garage where they can send their customers and continue to let their employees and themselves park in front of their establishments. We keep getting warned about falling for all the sucker offers that want payment in cards or any other fast way to steal your money. Don’t you realize that our mighty developers are looking at us to pay them by building a garage for the developers use–they just want it paid in taxes instead of a money card.

  12. Bill Mc for council, sounds great to me. Rumor has it that Keith Killion is running again. Wow, this will be an interesting year.

  13. 916 – – who is Bill Mc?? And, Keith running again? Sign me up for his campaign!!

  14. Glad to see we are get off the usual suspects and adding these to names to the discussion. Let beginning posters.

  15. CBD eateries claim they can’t get second and third seatings because there is no parking so they want s garage. I don’t recall Ridgewood ever, ..being on a top foodie list of places to go. And with so many places, and with the NY prices they want to charge, demand is just not there. Building a garage will not make people want to spend 30 per person for dinner for pizza, a chicken kebob, or pasta.

  16. Second and third seatings? Not fooling me. This is not tribecca

  17. What portion of the garage’s cost do these CDB eateries plan to contribute towards it’s construction? If they, and other property owners in the CBD think they actually need a garage, offer to pay something towards the cost. Like Health Barn who expects to be given everything she wants from the town of Ridgewood at no cost to her–and doesn’t even live in the town to pay some of her taxes towards it. Many of our CBD owners are also not residents. For both groups, “It’s no skin off their noses” if the garage fails. They are just due one as they so graciously have opened their business here and certainly must deserve a reward for being so good to our residents.

  18. We just Say NO.Bond plan and pave main roads at first sign of spring…
    target May..Franklin Ave and many others are completely rutted.Not sexy enough VC?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.