Dear Neighbor,
I am writing to share our “next steps” with respect to a proposed parking deck.
As you know, we have spent the last few months engaged in a community-wide conversation on this topic – one that has been asking and answering a series of fundamental questions: Do we need a parking deck? If so, what should it look like? How big should it be? Where should it be? How should we pay for it?
To inform this conversation and to fully involve the public, the Council did two things:
First, the Council commissioned architectural renderings and a financial analysis that – together – have not only helped answer those questions, but have also given us a good sense of the challenges and the opportunities. We have made all of the information available to the public on our website and have discussed it during several public meetings … including Council work sessions, a Planning Board meeting, a Historic Preservation Commission meeting and a handful of public forums that involved presentations by the design team and one-on-one conversations with the experts. The renderings — which have evolved to reflect input received throughout this process — have been on display at Village Hall, the train station and the library. And the Village Manager and I have even set up shop outside of Memorial Park at Van Neste to answer questions and hear people’s ideas and suggestions.
Second, the Council also decided to put a referendum question on the November 3 ballot, so that we could gauge public opinion. The result was not only a record turnout on Election Day; it was also a show of strong support for a parking deck, which received a full 65 percent of the vote. In fact, the parking deck was the big vote getter for the day … receiving more support than any of the candidates on the ballot … 3,236 votes in support!
Now, we need to move forward and decide on the size of a parking deck.
To that end, working with our design team, we have settled on three alternative designs. Each has pros and cons. Each reflects feedback received from people throughout our community. And each would cost much less than the $15 million originally discussed.
§ Option A: A parking deck with 4 floors and an open roof that could accommodate 405 cars and cost approximately $12 million. (The current rendering on the Village website.)
§ Option B: A parking deck with 3 ½ floors and an open roof that could accommodate 355 cars and cost approximately $11 million.
§ Option C: A parking deck with 3 floors and an open roof that could accommodate 306 cars and cost approximately $10.1 million.
To facilitate this decision, the design team met individually with Council members last week to go through these options, and the design team will be on hand at our next Council meeting on December 2 to do the same with residents, too. We are also making available in the Village Hall lobby renderings that show what each of the options would look like and the costs associated with them. Our plan is to make a decision by mid-December.
Your involvement throughout this process has been invaluable, and we want to hear from you … again. Please stop by the lobby. Please come to our December 2 meeting. Please let us know your preference.
And as we get closer to resolving this issue – the need for more parking – that has been discussed and debated for over 50 years, I sincerely hope that we can share in the excitement of the moment and work together to make it happen.
Thank you.
Paul
PS. Please let me know if you have questions.
Paul Aronsohn, Mayor
Village of Ridgewood
@paularonsohn
Why did the “design team” (gimme a break) meet with council members individuall Paul???? Trying to avoid a public meeting where all five could hear each other’s opinions and the public could be present? Hmmm, sounds like you tried to avoid the Open Public Meetings guidelines.
He’s going out with a bang….just like Obama.
7 more votes for Killion and we wouldn’t be in this mess.
He says the designer met with the council to go over plans and would be available to answer residents questions Dec 2. Can’t you read? I’m glad to see the parking issue finally addressed and apparently the majority of voters agree. I think it’s being well-handled.
“Now, we need to move forward and decide on the size of a parking deck.” Did you read (understand) the analysis in $500,000 parking study? BTW, with regards to the math above. $12 million for 405 spaces is $29,630 per space. $10.1 million for 306 spaces is $33,007 per space. What ever happened to the $18,000 per space price tag?
Yeah Paul, I have someq questions: have you and your colleagues in the Council completely lost your minds? Why expose VoR taxpayers to this stupidity? Why aren’t business owners in the CBD involved in helping to finance this? It’s great you’ve bought the line about the need for more parking, but above ground parking garages destroy pedestrian open space – which is poisonous in the CBD. Further, in 10 years many people won’t even own cars, they’ll have an auto-piloted, uber service if they need a car, which makes the garage another expensive anachronism that will fit in nicely with the run-down, old auto dealers and garages in our CBD. Just like Ozymandias said, “look on my works ye mighty, and despair!” This is pure stupidity.
Paul lost my vote and now I will work to remove him and Albert from office, they are arrogant morons
The horror, the horror
Our Village taxes went up 5%+ a year under Killion’s watch, despite his handpicked VM firing 10% of the Village workforce in 2010… But no cops got fired. And surprise, surprise, Killion voted yes on a 12% retroactive pay raise in 2011 for his boy after the VM had reopened the public safety contracts in 2010 and saddled us with 5 years more of bad contracts (unless you worked for the RPD since then). So keep moaning about the fact that Gwenn beat him by seven votes (blame Bush, too if you must), but he was part of an awful Council that screwed VoR taxpayers every chance they got, including conflicts of interest that broke state law and Village Code
have not the highest paid police officers all retired or are about to retire ???, and the new work force is starting a a much lower pay grade as per the contract you mentioned ?? Was not the wage increase a trade off for a lower pay scale ??? why not Join us on Monday December 7th 2015 as we honor six officers retiring from the Ridgewood Police Department with a dinner and Comedy show at Seasons Restaurant in Washington Township. Yes that’s 6 retirees (all part of the deal) all making 6 figures being replaced by guys making 5 figures . And by the way Killion recused himself from the vote and the contract negotiations unlike Gwen the Valley queen who refuses to recuse ??? You may want to get your facts straight .
9:59, yes we can read. The Mayor and his motley crew have their defenders at work. The point is, why have each member come in for a private meeting? They should each have been able to hear what the others are thinking, what plans they are favoring, and their reasoning. This stupid system circumnavigates the open public meeting act, and it does not good. Opinions will form before the December 2 meeting, when in fact they all should have started right out looking together in front of the public. That is not Paul’s way. He proclaims openness and transparency, and then holds these secret one-on-one meetings. Kind of like sliding the Health Barn in before telling the residents in the neighborhood. Kind of like letting the RSBA hand-deliver the ballfield grant application. Everything is done wrong under this regime, but it is deliberately done wrong in order for them to control the agenda. The three of them and Roberta stink.
10:23 – Hello Albert. Taking time off from your busy life to be one of the reprehensible anonymous bloggers, I see.
Ozymandias comment is hilarious. Ms. Sonenfeld is soliciting names for the monstrosity–nobody could beat that one.
“I’m glad to see the parking issue finally addressed and apparently the majority of voters agree.” I hate to say the majority of voters were fooled and lied to. Paul and Gwenn said that the design was not final, residents could have input, yada yada. I can’t believe people were stupid enough to fall for it.
The Walker study itself said this is not the best spot for parking. This lot is not even full until night and really the location only helps the restaurants on top of town and the commuters. Unless they plan on changing human nature too, daytime shoppers will not park in that garage and will resent feeding the meters more and later to pay for it.
James, the nine retirements through 2017 will cost the Village $715,177 just for accumulated leave payouts,,,, $80,000 per retiree, equivalent to six months of pay at their highest final salary including 10% longevity pay even though the sick days were awarded over 25 years at lower pay rates in the earlier years without longevity. That’s a savings?
This debacle will be just like village hall and a much higher price than $12million . So all that voted for this do not bitch when you see the final numbers.
Ah James the Mayor’s henchmen AKA the hand picked financially advisory board are posting again. Trying to change the subjects. When all else fails blame Gabbert,Killion Police, Fire and Teachers. All the time sitting in the million dollar homes. They would never show up to honor any of the above but they be the first ones to show up at The Library Gala or Valley Hospital Bal. l
Let be clear 10:25 are accusing killion of a crime? “including conflicts of interest that broke state law and Village Code”
12:11 that’s very interesting.
Why didn’t the town put some of that money away in previous years, knowing the retirements were coming?
You also forgot to mention future payouts have been capped at $15,000.
I guess the point is that Killion made some mistakes perhaps, but if he hadn’t did what he did across the board, the current council would never have been able to hold the line on taxes. With the benefit of his work, they are now able to claim fiscal responsibility, while they spend their way into mortgaging our future.
The town didn’t put money away because they were using it to offset other town expenses, the same way the do with the water company revenues. I expect this garage and yes it will be built, will be the next village hall boondoggle (over budget). Also it’s hard to put money away when you don’t notice that someone stole $500,000 or who knows what they actually stole. Sad that no one noticed revenues dropped by 50%.
Anyone pointing fingers at past Councils about conflicts of interest is clearly trying to divert attention away from the several conflicts with the current Council. Mr. Killion is long gone folks. We have several critical issues before this Council and the 3 majority members all seem to have cozy relationships with the parties that have a lot to gain from their “YES” vote. Money has already changed hands from Mr. Saraceno to our Council majority in the form of $1,000 fundraiser tickets for them and their dates. Mr. Pucciarelli and Mrs. Hauck have clear conflicts on the Valley Hospital lawsuit.
Apologists for the Council majority cry “old news” when these conflicts come up yet they point fingers at past Councils as a convenient way to deflect any blame that comes their way.
Does anyone here know anyone interested in running for the next council?
I think you have beat that $1,000 fundraiser tickets to death. Please stop!
The tickets were not worth $1,000.
They were worth whatever the cheap wine and rubber chicken that was served is valued at.
Otherwise it wouldn’t be a fundraiser.
Also, it is customary to invite local dignitaries to a fundraiser at no charge. (regardless of party)
Anyway…….
I never wanted to design a garage with a thousand other residents. I like having three plans to choose from. I will look at the designs.. If they are going to be variations on the brick prison I would probably go with the smallest.
Well 10:25!
Let be clear 10:25 are accusing killion of a crime? “including conflicts of interest that broke state law and Village Code”
I remember this resident Ed Feldsott getting up at a Village Council meeting and proclaiming that Paul Aronsohn was the only one on the council that cares about Ridgewood now I hear he is leading the charge along with other West siders to depose the candidates they overwhelmingly supported in the last election. Well based on their support for the 3 amigos 4 years ago the rest of the Ridgewood residents should look closely at any groups that are putting up their own candidate. These candidates may just be a one trick pony.
Whats the matter 10:25 ? Nothing to say? Why don’t you grow a set and either confirm or retract you statement? You remember your statement. Let me remind you “including conflicts of interest that broke state law and Village Code”
I hear that Ed Feldsott may run for council.
Dear 4.22
Sited Garage is a massive Boondoggle to the benefit of the RobberBaron Merchants..would not pass muster in Asbury Park nor Coney Island ..
Would need a Tear down plan within 12 years as an urban Re development
Initiative ..most of these merchants will have moved on to Florida ..Garage area will be the New Slum and crime and Drug zone, NOT A WONDERFUL FUTURE AHEAD FOR These poorly planned and allocated projects,ALL FOR WHAT . DINNER MARKETING plan..what a scam
WE NEED CHANGE AND NEED IT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE
Statement
of
the
Ridgewood
Financial
Advisory
Committee
Hudson
Street
Parking
Garage
The
Financial
Advisory
Committee
(the
“FAC”)
of
the
Village
of
Ridgewood
strongly
supports
the
proposal
to
construct
a
parking
garage
at
the
site
of
the
existing
Hudson
Street
parking
lot.
Members
of
the
FAC
have
carefully
reviewed
the
proposal,
including
discussions
with
Village
management
and
a
thorough
review
of
the
financial
analysis
prep
ared
by
Walker
Parking
Consultants
(the
“Walker
Study”).
Based
on
that
review,
we
believe
it
is
in
the
best
interests
of
the
Village
to
move
forward
with
the
project
.
We
would
like
to
highlight
the
following
points:
The
Walker
Study
substantiates
the
lo
ng
-‐
held
belief
of
many
of
our
residents
that
there
is
insufficient
parking
to
adequately
serve
the
Village
core.
While
there
is
ample
anecdotal
evidence
that
parking
is
difficult
in
downtown
Ridgewood,
the
Walker
Study
provides
factual
confirmation
based
on
observations
of
parking
usage
at
different
time
s
and
days
of
the
week.
We
believe
the
methodology
used
in
the
Walker
Study
is
reasonable
and
its
finding
s
accurate.
While
there
is
excess
capacity
in
parts
of
the
Village,
parking
demand
in
the
central
c
ore
exceeds
practical
supply
at
nearly
every
key
time
of
the
day.
As
set
forth
in
the
Walker
Study,
the
costs
of
the
parking
garage
can
be
supported
entirely
by
Village
parking
revenues,
assuming
small
increases
in
parking
rates
and
the
extension
of
metered
hours
to
9
p.m.
The
FAC
conducted
its
own
independent
analysis
of
the
costs
and
revenues
associated
with
the
proposed
parking
garage
.
Using
very
conservative
assum
p
tions
(
no
new
revenues
,
c
onstruction
costs
as
high
as
$14
million
a
nd
interest
rat
es
as
high
as
4%
)
the
garage
can
still
be
funded
entirely
by
parking
revenues
.
A
new
parking
garage
will
have
a
significant
positive
economic
impact
on
the
Village.
The
new
parking
garage
will
enhance
the
attractiveness
of
existing
stores
and
restaurants
,
encourage
new
businesses
owners
to
choose
Ridgewood,
and
modernize
our
parking
infrastructure.
We
recognize
that
while
parking
revenues
should
cover
the
cost
of
the
garage,
funding
the
garage
still
creates
an
additional
financial
obligation
for
the
Vill
age
,
which
would
need
to
be
met
by
other
sources
in
the
unlikely
event
that
parking
revenues
f
e
ll
short
.
However,
we
think
the
substantial
benefits
offered
by
a
garage
support
taking
on
that
obligation.
*
*
*
In
its
last
annual
report
to
the
Village
Cou
ncil,
the
FAC
stated
that
“
addressing
the
Village
’
s
parking
problem
is
probably
the
single
best
thing
the
Council
could
do
for
the
c
entral
b
usiness
d
istrict.
”
Parking
has
been
an
issue
in
Ridgewood
for
decades
.
Finally,
we
have
an
opportunity
to
address
the
parking
problem,
and
thereby
safeguard
Ridgewood
’
s
appeal
as
a
destination
for
dining
and
shopping
,
and
preserve
the
vibrancy
of
our
central
business
district.
The
FAC
encourages
you
to
vote
“
YES
”
for
parking
on
November
3
Speaking of Boondoggle what ever happen to the investigation of the illegal dumping of concrete at the leaf dump. Does this act have to go on American Most Wanted to get the answer?
Rich, you are wrong, the tickets were valued at $1000. Plain and simple. That is what paying guests paid, so that is what they were worth. Saraceno has (and had at the time) an application in before the planning board. Gifting the council members an opportunity to meet the governor was wrong, and their accepting of these complimentary tickets was wrong. We are all so sorry that you are sick of hearing about it. The fact that you are sick of hearing about it does not mean that their taking those tickets was right.
Well said 8:45. I guess Rich forgot this is a non partisan town They didn’t have to go. That just an excuses the the 3 amigos apologist are using
8:16 PM: thank you, e. e. cummings, for returning to the dead to post a message on our humble blog. It’s not the greatest poetry I’ve ever read, but let’s say that reading it was a challenge.
…oops–returning FROM the dead…Freudian slip?
Re 8.16 rackem & Stackem post. Was a towering Inferno of Inconvenient Facts of the Epic Garage boondoggle,Future generations will ask Repeatedly..WHAT THE HELL WERE THOSE TOWN MANAGERS THINKING..and How the Hell did they Get those Sheep Voters to the Slaughterhouse so easily. EPIC FAIL ..And they Put it on the Highest Hill in Town…CONEY ISLAND CONCRETE MONOLITH TO THE RESTAURANT CLUB,,
The financial advisory committee is composed of really smart financial professionals who happen to be residents. That does not mean they are experts on municipal garages, human behavior, traffic patterns, municipal service usage, school enrollment patterns or anything of the other stuff being thrown their way. They should stick to looking at numbers in columns, and not asked to forecast items such as parking patterns of which they are not experts.
Dear 7.22 well stated ..this is Amateur Hour with very Serious consequences for our village, financially esthetically..how could we say no to the next petting zoo megaplex once the shadow falls across the smallest neighborhood where the Martians landed the super-dome..tenants will run not walk and the parking zone will start its life as a dirty ugly congested and unsafe area to be near.Get the Body Bada ready
When the out of TOWNERS scream out of that garage to a street Grid backed up all the way To the Top floor of this largest Mistake.