Apartment builders need a lot. Make the builders pay for a large portion of the garage IF WE BUILD ONE. Otherwise, make them provide adequate parking in their construction. This “most of the residents won’t have a car” stuff is as big of an imaginary concept as “There will almost no new school children” is a pipe dream. Even though Ridgewood’s education is no longer good enough for national bragging, it is better than some school districts. You say “people buy and leave the second their child graduates”. Renting an apartment will accomplish the same thing at a much cheaper cost. Those are the families who will fill the apartments. Is Ridgewood going to set a limit for the number of people in each apartment? These people, like many of our current apartment dwellers, are used to being crowded. It would be worth it to many if it meant putting their children into a better school. Now, each of these families must have at least one, if not two, cars to get the parents to work. And they’ll need much more water than a single older couple would utilize, etc. etc. Ridgewood taxpayers shouldn’t need to pay more than a very few dollars if the builders must pay and the big businesses (most of whose owners are not Ridgewood residents) should be forced to contribute also. They’re the ones screaming that “their businesses will fail w/o a garage”. Let them “put their money where their mouth is”!.
There is no way we should build a garage for the developers, even if they pay. Why would we ever devote public lands to enable developers to profit off of their private development? Let the developers scale back on the number of apartments and build parking right on their premises. Stupidest idea I have heard in support of the unneeded garage.
This council has let us down. I thought they would put in parking decks one level at both ends of town. They are catering to what they think the electorate wants. I won’t vote for them this spring; I am disappointed. Strongly supported them in the past. Probably won’t vote at all; depends whose running.
Why not try this idea…those that want a garage pay for the garage. let’s have those Villagers who want a garage register their preference at Village Hall. All in favor will have their property taxes adjusted accordingly over a two year period once a garage cost is finalized and approved by our council members.. Of course, our council members would automatically be counted as voting in favor of a new garage.
I would offer further, that those who are paying for the garage can decided on its size and design. Once interests and financial responsibility are aligned, the rest of us can move on to other matters….such as observing just how long that pro-garage line is on Registration Day..
7.17. I feel the same. We’re are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Don’t vote for the incumbents and you run the chance of getting Aronsohn cronies, vote for the incumbents and you still get the same mediocre performance. I guess it will be a last minute decision.
Brian 9:19 for Mayor or Finance director ..HE IS RIGHT..this is not a done deal TAXPAYERS..we are not their kept Sheep.,STANDUP TAXPAYERS
VC, listen up. Lease the Hudson lot to a developer for 99 years. Let the developer pay for it completely. Let them charge what they want to make it a profitable. Let them pay the cost of maintenance. Let them cut deals with local merchants, banks and restaurants for validated parking, and take nothing from them except the usual property taxes. Then, see how many developers step up. If the number is ZERO, then you have an indication that the idea is a LOSER. The Village already collects taxes from the CBD property owners, so why LOSE money by going into the garage business?
Very sensible idea 12:35. The Village should enter into a long term land lease with parking garage company who will pay to construct and operate the parking facility.. Since they are an independent business they should be able to charge whatever rates they wish.. Ultimately the market will determine determine how much people are willing to pay.
12:35 great questions ..answer is that promises have been made to influential developers and this gig is up.Taxpapers rally around this..NOT ON OUR WATCH DUDES.revert to 1:18 see if they stampede out of the deal so we can vote for someone who knows how to pave ,line and rehab 3 neglected surface lots and make them a success or failure..we can all live with that rather than a car condo raised parking deck via towns liability welfare program for new condos for developers to stack the schools so they can convince us that they need to build bigger schools for us …NOT…