Posted on

Village Authorizes Non-Binding Referendum for Hudson Street Parking Garage for Nov 3, 2015 Ballot

parking garage cbd

Hudson Street Parking Garage

Two important forums scheduled in Village Hall – 4th Floor Court Room – to discuss the proposed Hudson Street Parking Deck: Wednesday, October 21 and Monday, November 2 from 7:30pm to 9:30pm. Village professionals as well as the design team from Desman Associates will be on hand to discuss all aspects of the proposed parking deck, including the design and financials. All are welcome to attend. All questions are welcome!

Walker Parking Preliminary Financial Analysis – October 2, 2015

Walker Parking Consultant Study – July 5th, 2015

Walker Parking Floor Plans

Resolutions

Resolution 15-222 : Non-Binding Referendum – Nov 3, 2015 Ballot

Resolution 15-303 : Desman, Inc.

Ordinances

Ordinance 3480

16 thoughts on “Village Authorizes Non-Binding Referendum for Hudson Street Parking Garage for Nov 3, 2015 Ballot

  1. Horrendous and so over-sized for the space. The visual they show is so misleading. We all know how narrow and congested that street becomes with the church next door.

    I do not understand why we can’t add second levels to a few lots around town and call it a day.

  2. Those that vote in favor try to remember all the cost overruns at village hall.This has not started yet and the number of $15,000,000 is being talked about . Ask yourself who is going to pay?

  3. What the heck is going on here? A resolution passed awarding Desman the contract but the public won’t vote until Nov. 3? So if voter majority say NO, how do you break the contact with Desman? This is the most ass-backwards governing body of all time.

  4. i agree with 12:55, it is horrendous and oversized. Say goodbye to sunlight on the street. A one-level deck would double the amount of parking and not block the views or the sidewalk. it would be easy to plow and de-ice in the winter. There would not be security problems of vagrants in the building or possible crime in the elevator. Possible car fires could easily be extinguished. But then there would not be big money lining the pockets of the developers and the developers pals. And then they would not be able to increase our taxes to fund this lunacy.

  5. It does not matter if we all vote against it because Big Al stated that he was elected to do what he thinks is right and by god he will do what he thinks is right even if the public disagrees.

  6. I mistakenly posted this on a different topic. “If a municipality does not know the actual cost for operating, maintaining, repairing, enforcing, and collecting from its parking facilities, it cannot know the net revenue derived from parking fees, or whether its parking fee structure is appropriate.”

    http://www.state.nj.us/state/planning/publications/180-parking-matters-070106.pdf

  7. 43,000 per parking space!!!

  8. This is a scandal.will open the floodgates for anything goes approach to Ridgewood TAXPAYERS UNLIMITED Liability. Wake up Ridgewood your
    nightmare is at your Front Doors and we are footing the cost exposure on a continuing Basis.IT WILL BE THE NEW SLUM HIGH CRIME SECTION OF THE TOWN.Look at other towns parking decks ..ALL HORRENDUS..

  9. How many times can I vote No?

  10. Looks like Coney Island shanty town. A Tragic Boondogle. Vote NO

  11. THIS IS Just Horrible…welcome to your first sanctioned commercial Slum District, hey 14 Million…No Problem…Time to Sell and get out of here.

  12. You’re voting on the location and the issuance of debt. The design is still up for discussion and is not part of the referendum. It’s time to solve a 50 year old problem.

  13. The same democrats that littered the town with the “read our plan” signs seem to be promoting the garage.
    Would you EVER trust a politician?
    Vote no

  14. Like everything else people want to build in this town this is just too big. Starting with Valley – nobody would oppose a modernized hospital but double in size? Who doesn’t want the CBD spruced up but triple the number of units per acre? Of course we need parking – but this? Can’t we just start a little smaller?

  15. And smarter ? Just add a deck on the lot by the Post Office. Let everyone benefit.

  16. The rendering is so misleading. Half the picture is blue sky. The drawing has no Knights of Columbus building but people mingling on an open corner. This garage is huge!! Look how small the cars are in proportion to the garage. It will tower over the church. This is going to costs us $20 million…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.