The Village Manager is correct. There currently is a parking surplus on several days during the week and on weekends. This information conflicts with data compiled over the years by trained parrking professionals who performed studies of the parking situation in Ridgewood.
So what has happened ?? Ridgewood did have a severe parking problem as outlined in study after study conducted by professionals over the past 89 years. More recently observations have been made by residents and others that the parking problem is not nearly as severe as heretofore thought. The question then is what has changed ? It is this writers belief there has been a fundamental and dramatic shift the way people shop…..and to a lesser extent how they dine. The web has deciminated retail stores both large and small and this is not going to change.More and more people prefer to shop online and this trend shall remain.
Downtown shopping may become obsolete as virtually anything you desire is only a few clicks away ….and can be delivered. right to your doorstep. The problem we are facing is the death of the traditional “downtown” as we know it. Businesses and restaurants will leave, empty buildings will profilerate and what was once described as a vibrant but “quaint” downtown comprised of older buildings containing a wide mix of tenants will suddenly be preceived as seedy and tired when vacancies rise and business flee town.
What will the new Council do to turn this toxic situation around and restore the vitality of the downtown. Some aergue that a garage would provide the majic cure. While it may help it will not provide the elixir that will get the CBD back on its feet again. It will take a garage AND a lot of work to re-build a downtown that can effectively compete with web providers and mega -stores. We can do it but it will cost money ….lots of it and it will take a comprehensive plan….whcih unfortunately no one seems interested in undertaking and.nor do we even have the skills to create such a plan. At present Ridgewood is in the worst possible position
Ridgewood NJ, Before you vote today, please take a moment to watch this video of Councilmen elect Ramon Hache. It will give you a clearer idea of what the New Village Council plans to do regarding a comprehensive parking solution. Ramon discuses parking, signage , and much much more.
This is a reminder that tomorrow is a Ridgewood-only election to vote yes or no on a binding referendum for the financing of a parking deck at Hudson Street.
The referendum question on the ballot tomorrow is:
Shall ordinance No. 3521 submitted by referendum petition providing for the Council of the Village of Ridgewood to issue $11,5000,000 bonds or notes to finance the cost of constructing the Hudson Street parking deck, be adopted? Yes or No
Please note that polls are open from 6 A.M. to 8 P.M.
You may also refer to the Village website at www.ridgewoodnj.net for more information.
All information courtesy of The Preserve Graydon Coalition
Events since our June 8 newsletter describing tomorrow’s special election reinforce the importance of voting NO.
The two continuing and three incoming council members do not support the current iteration of the garage, believing that anything built at the corner of Hudson and South Broad Streets should be smaller and not stick out into the street.
The same concern to preserve the Village’s historic character that led the Preserve Graydon Coalition to oppose ill-advised ideas about replacing Graydon with a concrete pool now drives us to join a number of grassroots groups and individuals to oppose the $11.5 million parking garage bond in tomorrow’s binding referendum.
More than a radical alteration in our skyline
Even now, at the 11th hour, many, perhaps even most, residents do not comprehend what’s at stake. And it’s more than a big garage.
Although the official word is that the $11.5 million bond that is the sole item on tomorrow’s ballot would not inevitably fund any particular garage design, it is generally understood that the contract, already prepared and ready to go, would force the new council’s hand, giving them little leeway in determining what, if anything, should be built on the parking lot at Hudson and Broad, and taxpayers would be stuck with the bill.
The garage construction contract that has been readied in hopes of a “yes” vote is said to incorporate a 6% penalty on either side for making changes even though it’s impossible to predict everything that will happen. If the referendum passed and the contract were quickly signed before the outgoing council’s final day, June 30, the new council’s hands would be tied. Apparently that is precisely what the outgoing council members desire, although they deny it. Tomorrow’s special election could have been scheduled for next month, weeks after the new council had taken office—but the “council majority” set it on the first possible day.
Several members of our Village Council have put their concerns in writing. Excerpts, with full text available through the links that follow:
Councilman Mike Sedon:
“I will be voting no in Tuesday’s special election.
In order for the new council to move forward with a comprehensive parking plan for the Central Business District, which includes a reasonable parking structure, it is imperative that we can do so without having our hands tied by the outgoing council majority.
A no vote will not defeat a parking structure. It will allow us, the new council, to incorporate such a structure into the fabric of our CBD along with other solutions that have been mentioned in the past by some of my other colleagues and myself.
A true parking committee should be formed that includes residents, property and business owners along with Village officials to further explore any other ideas that could improve our situation.
The mayor’s previous parking committee did not include residents, and in my opinion resulted in information that appeared filtered and then potentially misrepresented when it reached the wider public.
This outgoing council majority has proven over and over that they cannot be trusted, and I for one will not give them any more trust by supporting what has become a monument to deceit and manipulation.”
Councilman-Elect Ramon Hache:
“Ultimately we have a parking distribution problem in our CBD, not a parking deck problem. We have already begun planning for more cost-effective solutions that will require minimal expenditures. . . . The notion that a single parking deck will solve our parking problem is in itself an outdated 90 year old idea.”
Letter to the Editor, The Ridgewood News, June 10, 2016:
“. . .the Hudson St garage addresses a symptom but not the disease. . . . I am voting no (to not adopt ordinance No. 3521) on June 21st. As a Village, let’s put together something that makes sense, is clear as to what our monies are to be used for, and makes our central business district more user friendly.”
Residents are shocked by the lengths to which Paul Aronsohn and his yes-persons on the Council have gone, along with the Village Manager and others, to make their garage happen.
Dave Slomin, representing Ridgewood Citizens for Reasonable Development (RCRD, formerly Citizens for a Better Ridgewood), notes that the garage would set new guidelines for size and scale that developers would use to obtain permission to construct bigger and more dense buildings here. High-density developers could seek garage-related “parking variances,” giving them the opportunity to build as big as they wanted under new high-density ordinances passed by the outgoing mayor’s voting bloc.
A new lawsuit and a new ethics complaint
A lawsuit has been filed in Superior Court claiming misuse of Village funds and employees’ time to create a video posted on the village website that urges residents to vote for the referendum:
In addition, a complaint has been filed with the Local Finance Board in Hackensack—the agency that enforces the Local Government Ethics Law—by the Open Government Advocacy Project of the New Jersey Libertarian Party. The letter names Mayor Paul Aronsohn and Village Manager Roberta Sonenfeld as having violated “N.J.S.A. 40A:9-22.5(c), which prohibits a local government officer from ‘using’ or attempting to use his official position to secure unwarranted privileges or advantages for himself or others.”
The video was watched several times by Rev. Msgr. Ronald J. Rozniak (Father Ron), Pastor of Our Lady of Mount Carmel Church, who wrote in his weekly bulletin yesterday (pages 2-3) that it “lists a number of entities that were consulted. You will not hear the name of Our Lady of Mount Carmel mentioned . . . . Incredibly, the single largest reality, neighbor, directly across the street from the deck, not four or six blocks away was ignored. This is despite the fact that Mount Carmel hired its own traffic consultant from an equally reputable traffic consulting firm.”
If reducing Hudson St. to two lanes would “eliminate the on-street parking on the church side of Hudson,” he wrote, it would “unquestionably have a negative impact on the operations of Our Lady of Mount Carmel.”
More quarters in the meter for longer hours
To repay the bond—a loan, after all, not a gift—we would face extended street parking meter hours and fees, including at the Route 17 Park & Ride, rising incrementally over time. This would add insult to injury for taxpaying residents while driving shoppers and diners to the many surrounding towns that provide parking for free. Only a few years ago, when meter hours were extended to 8 pm, downtown business owners objected to the council and the end time for feeding meters reverted to 6 pm. Why would 9 pm fare better than 8 pm did?
For these reasons, we consider it essential to reject the proposed bond and to vote NO onTuesday, June 21.
If tomorrow’s referendum passes, the three outgoing council members, while stating repeatedly that the new council will be in control, are prepared to rush-approve a contract for an enormous garage via a special council meeting a week before leaving office. That would leave the new council in a “bind.”
Bonding…binding…bind.
Only by voting down the referendum can residents prevent GarageZilla from rising above all it surveys at the corner of Hudson and Broad.
Where to vote: wherever you usually do. Polls will be open from 6 am to 8 pm.
To share this message (please do), click on “Forward this message to a friend” below the pail photo below.
Swimmingly,
Marcia Ringel and Alan Seiden
Co-Chairs, The Preserve Graydon Coalition, Inc., a nonprofit corporation
Ridgewood NJ, the Ridgewood train station was buzzing with activity this morning as Council Person Mike Sedon payed a visit to encouraging people to vote in tomorrows special election . The June 21 referendum is asking residents if they want to repeal an ordinance to bond $11.5 million to construct the Hudson Street parking deck.
The Village Council approved the resolution certifying a petition put forth by a committee of five dedicated residents. The petition calls for a repeal of an ordinance the council approved in March bonding $11.5 million for the project.
A “NO” vote is by no means and end to the parking garage but it does give the incoming council , that won election in a historic landslide more input in to the process.
I hope everyone realizes the Progress Ridgewood postcard in the mail is the same old group of liars, and their propaganda….like, do I even need to point out that the quotes were taken out of context and distorted to make the point look like it was agreed upon??? I hope not.
Don’t be fooled by the flyer/mailer from Progress Ridgewood which claims that the new council elect wants you to vote yes. That’s simply not true.
Bernies quote was from 2011 or so when a CONCEPT was being discussed.
This new council is in support of parking solutions. Including a garage that fits the lot, and is appropriate to the neighborhood.
Let THEM decide the funding and look at all of the facts. Ridgewood voters came out in RECORD numbers in May to elect them. Now let them be responsible for what happens next. And do NOT be fooled, the outgoing lot of fibbers and thieves will do anything at all that they can to stick it to the village and to have their way.
Vote NO on Tuesday and let the new council decide. We can have the problems fixed by honest people with the villages best interest at heart. Not greedy developers and sneaky politicians. VOTE NO JUNE 21!!!! .
Ridgewood Nj, In this VoR clip from April 6, 2016, at the 1:14:00 mark, you see the village manager admit we have a parking surplus, not crisis: https://www.tubechop.com/watch/8113003 .
THIS TUESDAY – June 21st – Special Election In Ridgewood. Please Vote NO.
Don’t be fooled by the flyer/mailer from Progress Ridgewood which claims that the new council elect wants you to vote yes. That’s simply not true.
Here is a letter from Dave Slomin, who has sent it on belahf of CBR:
Subject: Why A Garage NO VOTE on Tues 6/21 is Important to Limiting High-Density Housing & More – PLEASE VOTE 6/21!
URGENT REQUEST: Ridgewood Citizens for Reasonable Development (formerly CBR) urges you to Vote in the Garage Referendum THIS TUESDAY, 6/21. Vote at your normal polling place. While we always want you to vote upon your own beliefs, HERE IS WHY WE SUPPORT A “NO” VOTE in this election:
PLEASE VIEW THIS VIDEO, BY RCRD SUPPORTER, JIM McCARTHY:https://youtu.be/3MSgIMYcfyA
WE BELIEVE…
1. The Garage Design D developed by the outgoing Mayor and his Voting Block is TOO BIG, CREATING FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING PROBLEMS. “TOO BIG” IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE:
a. It will set new size and scale guidelines that will be used by developers to enable them to build bigger and denser in our Village.
b. It offers opportunity for high density developers to seek ‘parking variances’ enabling them to build bigger denser properties. Without garage related variances, these developers don’t have enough parking to build as big as they want under the new High-Density Ordinances passed by the outgoing Mayor’s Voting Block.
2. Location of this massive garage does not solve the parking problem throughout Ridgewood.
a. Puts all new parking in one corner of town and will not help shoppers and businesses in other areas.
b. We need a better plan for improving parking throughout our downtown.
c. AND… in an essay written before the Mayor aligned himself with the High-Density Developers the Mayor himself said: “I am not convinced that we need a large, potentially expensive garage in our downtown area… In fact, the more I learn about the situation, the more I believe that a garage now would be a big mistake.” https://www.paularonsohn.com/writ…/time-for-action-on-parking
d. RCRD believes that before we sign contracts for a poorly-designed, over-sized, over-scaled, very expensive garage, we should make other parking improvements first:
i. Investigate the purchase of additional ground level lots, like the one behind the movie theater, to spread parking around
ii. Improve signage, alerting drivers to existing lots like the underused Cottage Street Lot
iii. Evaluate making CDB cross streets one-way with all angled parking to add many spaces
iv. Remove the existing archaic buffers between existing parallel spaces to add many spaces
3. Garage Financing Has Not Been Adequately Tested and may become a Tax Burden on Residents if untested projections fail:
a. The garage does not and will not fund it self
b. It will be paid for by raising parking rates in other downtown areas by up to 300-400% and increasing parking hours from 6pm until up to 9pm.
c. The last time Ridgewood tried increasing hours, the Chamber of Commerce themselves complained and hours were reduced back to 6pm
d. THIS NEEDS TO BE TESTED FIRST… AN $11,500,000 BOND IS TO MUCH TO GAMBLE ON!
SPENDING $11,500,000 ON A PROJECT THAT SHOWS EVIDENCE OF INADEQUATE PLANNING IS BAD GOVERNMENT AND BAD FOR RIDGEWOOD’S FUTURE
A NO VOTE WILL ALLOW THE NEW COUNCIL THE LEEWAY TO GET PARKING RIGHT FOR RIDGEWOOD!
LET THE NEW COUNCIL GET THIS RIGHT!
Ridgewood NJ, As you can see from the reports prepared by the Village’s own expert’s parking rates are going sky high, hours are getting longer, enforcement is going to get tougher and shop owners more than a few blocks from GarageMahal will actually see business decrease because of the steps needed to subsidize the massive garage the Mayor wants to bond on June 21.
So it not hard to see why landlords who own properties and businesses right next to the Garage are working so hard and stooping so low to get the “YES “ vote out. It’s worth a ton of money to them in increased rents and property values. For example, Paul Vagianos, who controls the Pearl Restaurant building directly adjacent to the Hudson St lot, runs It’s greek to me less than a block away and now has an interest in FISH, also immediately adjacent, was handing out flyers to morning commuters yesterday that used snippets of conversations with Incoming Council Members, taken out context, to falsely imply the incoming Council was endorsing a “Yes” vote, when he knows this is not true. Lass week in a Letter to the Editor of Ridgewood News incoming Councilman Jeff Vioght clearly laid out his own reasons why he is voting “No” on Tuesday. For others to imply he supports a “yes” vote is wrong, but large amounts of money will make some people do unsavory things
This is financial analysis data is all drawn directly from reports on the Village Website
Here is what rates to subsidize the Mayor’s Design will look like (they might move around by street or lot or hour but its a zero sum game, the cost of the garage is what it is and the money is going to be found from taxpayer’s pocket either when they are shopping/dining or when they are paying
their mortgage)
Here is what enforcement is going to look like and if your business if too far away to benefit you are
Don’t let anyone tell you that bigger garages are always more economical than smaller garages
Some confusion has been building the past few days surrounding the upcoming June 21st special referendum vote for local bond ordinance 3521, and I want to take this opportunity to unequivocally state my opinion.
I will be voting no in Tuesday’s special election.
In order for the new council to move forward with a comprehensive parking plan for the Central Business District, which includes a reasonable parking structure, it is imperative that we can do so without having our hands tied by the outgoing council majority.
A no vote will not defeat a parking structure. It will allow us, the new council, to incorporate such a structure into the fabric of our CBD along with other solutions that have been mentioned in the past by some of my other colleagues and myself.
I would like to explore the option of creating one way streets on Chestnut, Oak, North Walnut streets and Cottage Place to add angled parking on both sides. This could potentially increase parking by 60 to 80 spots on the street right in front of where customers are trying to go. A side benefit could also be increased pedestrian safety, as visitors to our CBD would only have to look one way for oncoming traffic.
A comprehensive plan could also include the purchase or leasing of private lots throughout the CBD and an expansion of technology to aid in the parking solution.
A true parking committee should be formed that includes residents, property and business owners along with Village officials to further explore any other ideas that could improve our situation.
The mayor’s previous parking committee did not include residents, and in my opinion resulted in information that appeared filtered and then potentially misrepresented when it reached the wider public.
This outgoing council majority has proven over and over that they cannot be trusted, and I for one will not give them any more trust by supporting what has become a monument to deceit and manipulation.
The new council is willing and excited to work with the public and bring all interested residents along in a process that we can be proud of as a community.
Residents spoke loud and clear in the May 10th Village Council election with the landslide victory of three bright, intelligent and independent candidates, who I am greatly looking forward to calling my colleagues very soon.
Please send that message one more time with a no vote on Tuesday and let the new council finish this important work for the benefit of all of Ridgewood.
Ridgewood NJ, The village, in the voice of the Village Manager, admits on April 6, 2016 that we do not have a parking crisis, we have a parking surplus, we have more spots than we have demand for:https://youtu.be/iyufI5C3gKU?t=1h14m So we know from the facts the big garage is all about high density housing, not restaurants. Without it, the over development of Ridgewood cannot happen. Without over development the property owners, who paid a lot for the land, cannot make money. They need to develop the lots past what parking on the property supports to maximize rental revenue. The village and the developers lie about Brogan and Ken Smith parking spaces needing to be replaced, spots that are not a part of the public parking inventory.
The garage is the Trojan Horse. The village now admits, we don’t need more parking, we don’t even utilize what we have. Higher density, higher congestion, higher fees. They want a city.
When the village manager in a propaganda video says we have a parking crisis, but her own analysis says we have a surplus, we know there is no crisis.
I don’t understand how supporters of the majority council don’t have a problem that these 3, plus Roberta lied to residents to get that November vote. That is telling and shameful- all residents whether you want a garage or not should have no tolerance for such trickery.
Telling residents nothing has been decided with respect to design when indeed, the design has been decided, and we are not disclosing that our chosen design is 12 feet in the street was wrong and horrible leadership. Contracts to begin specs for design A were signed on October 28th – before the vote!!! It was deceitful and despicable, with no accountability and cost taxpayers $120,000 in change orders.
I can understand and be sympathetic to mistakes but not deliberate and deceitful plotting and scheming to get what you want. The current design is still too big. It is 5 feet in the street and 60’10” tall…not 46′ that they keep saying -which is frickin ridiculous they don’t count the towers when discussing height. Mt. Carmel (FYI is 50′ tall) will be here a lot longer than any restaurant or business. The way these people have disrespected the church and ALL residents is shameful, and to defend that behavior or turn a blind eye because you want a garage….what? Why?
Ridgewood NJ, Jim McCarthy is a fourteen-year resident of Ridgewood as well as the father of four daughters and husband to his wife, Gail. Listen to what he has to say about the upcoming garage vote on June 21st.
Ramon M. Hache Councilman-Elect Village of Ridgewood
Ridgewood NJ, On June 21st, residents will be voting on a binding referendum regarding the bonding of $11,500,000 to finance the cost of building the Hudson Street parking deck. There is a high level of speculation and misinformation circulating, including print and video propaganda posted on the Village website. As a member of the next Council, I feel it is important to communicate my views regarding the overall parking issue.
I am, first and foremost, committed to improving the quality of life of our residents, public safety and the health and well-being of our Central Business District. I certainly recognize that bringing additional parking to our Village, if properly done, will enhance quality of life, public safety and the vibrancy of our CBD. Also, as I stated during my campaign, I am supportive of a parking deck on Hudson Street. It is also important to note that the next Council is committed to implementing a comprehensive parking solution, that includes a parking deck, but most importantly, will bring much needed parking relief to the entire CBD. A parking deck on Hudson Street, while crucial, only solves part of the problem. Ultimately we have a parking distribution problem in our CBD, not a parking deck problem. We have already begun planning for more cost-effective solutions that will require minimal expenditures.
Without knowing the outcome of the June 21st referendum, we are exploring all options including the impact and viability of a smaller deck on Hudson Street combined with a second deck/lot at the corner of Walnut and Franklin. While the Hudson Street deck will address the parking needs of commuters and patrons of the shops and restaurants within its immediate proximity, we also need to consider the parking needs of the rest of the CBD. Again, this is why solutions in addition to the Hudson Street deck are so crucial.
We will be working with an expanded group of experts, residents, board and committee members. We are fortunate to have a tremendous amount of intelligent and caring people in our community. We will leverage their knowledge, expertise and love of community to devise the right solution that meets the broader needs of our Village, not just of a selected few.
Ridgewood has waited 90 years for a parking solution, not just a parking deck. The notion that a single parking deck will solve our parking problem is in itself an outdated 90 year old idea. The Village needs a comprehensive and modern parking solution that is both innovative and reflective of the world we live in. Coupled with bringing a better mix of businesses, it should serve to enhance an already vibrant Central Business District.
Being fiscally conscious, we want to avoid unnecessary and costly expenses including changes in work orders. The Village Council has already spent over $600,000 of taxpayer money and we have not added a single additional parking space. The next Council will make final decisions regarding size, shape, and look of the Hudson Street parking deck. What the final comprehensive solution will look like, will depend on the outcome of the referendum. Therefore it would be premature at this time to communicate any specific plan but rest assured we are prepared for either possible outcome. As I had promised during my campaign, I will support whatever the people want to do and I will not direct residents on how to vote. It is my duty as a member of the Council, to listen to the voice of the people and act accordingly. I look forward to working for you, and with you, in moving forward on the various important issues our Village is facing.
