by Anne LaGrange Loving
Ridgewood NJ, This afternoon around 1 PM we were on the horse-drawn carriage, part of the Ridgewood Guild Winter Festival, which was an absolutely wonderful event. As the carriage headed west on Hudson toward Broad, lo and behold there were many empty parking spots in the Hudson Street lot. Yes, indeed, on a holiday weekend, less than a month until Christmas, one of the busiest shopping days of the year, with a big event occurring in the park, with people going out to eat because they are sick of turkey……all of that, and still plenty of spaces.
Moreover, as we headed north on Broad and looked back, we saw the beautiful spires of Mt. Carmel and United Methodist churches……these will no longer be visible, not even close to visible, if the gigantic garage is built on that corner. Food for thought.
Good work !
Lots of empty spots and lots of broken meters.
The FAC said it will work.
And this is why we need a parking garage.
Have no fear if the garage is not paid for by meter revenue. The FAC will suggest cell towers to supplement income or maybe signs and banners advertising business.
In town for dinner last night. Had my choice of parking spots.
And noticed that the valets were not busy.
Nice confirmation bias everyone! You’re using a holiday weekend when many people are traveling and others have alternate schedules as evidence for no need for extra parking. How about we look at actual data on peak demand, like from Friday and Saturday nights on summer and fall weekends? That will give a much more accurate picture of need than anything this past weekend.
These people are out of towners. I see residents walking every day to restaurants we are not sheep drinking Paul’s coolaid. This is a massive mistake
I live right in downtown and walk year round. I also support a parking garage. So what if people who drive and park are from out of town? Ridgewood residents will get better restaurants and better retail the more people that want to come here and shop and eat. More people wanting to come to Ridgewood to spend their money is better for everyone, residents, visitors, business owners, and taxpayers. And people who walk aren’t affected by increased car traffic anyway!
Unless they can dash quickly enough around the new super dome..
Traffic Increases injury and pollution.go see the Ramsey NJT PARKING DECK.AN UNDERUTILZED BOONDOGGLE
4:49 – agreed….NJT garage Ramsey is a white elephant….10% occupancy during the peak hours of the work week….
Paulie will have to move out of Rwood…he will be openly scorned otherwise.
So John V you get up early in the morning catch the train work all day in the city and then catch the train back to town.Arrive in Ridgewood between 6 and 7:30 and then go shopping or to a restaurant in Ridgewood. Is that what your trying to tell us.
No need to spend 15m on a garage to benefit restaurant owners for 3-4!hours on a Friday or Saturday night.
If these restaurants are so important then we should triple their tax assessments in order to cover the cost of the garage since they are the main beneficiaries.
The other shop keepers are to dumb to not have their stores open at night to take advantage of the added foot traffic.
6:22 –
I work in Fair Lawn actually so I typically drive. Though I’ve taken the train a half dozen times or so since work is near station there. My family and I do indeed shop and eat in Ridgewood, on foot most of the time. Took a long walk this afternoon around downtown and stopped at the Starbucks for a bit. We probably get food from Ridgewood restaurants in downtown 1-3x per week.
6:55 –
Look at the actual data from the Walker report: https://mods.ridgewoodnj.net/pdf/manager/2015walkerFinal.pdf
Table 6 indicates that the “core area” is nearly at capacity on weekdays both during the days and the nights. Table 8 shows that on weekends capacity is okay during the day, but basically full in the core area at night. Thus, the core area is “full” much of the week, not just on weekend nights.
Walker Report : Demand stream is not anticipated to cover debt service for the Ridgewood Parking garage
https://theridgewoodblog.net/walker-report-demand-stream-is-not-anticipated-to-cover-debt-service-for-the-ridgewood-parking-garage/
John V – the photo speaks volumes. Empty spots and plenty of them on one of the busiest shopping days of the year and when everyone’s family is in town and eating out. If the lots don’t fill that day, then do you really think we need 300 MORE spots stacked over a semi-empty lot? Is the V for Vagianos?
James don’t let the facts cloud the issue.
“core area” The area around Greek to Me, Fish, Park West and the place that took over Blend.
7:41 – the place that took over Blend ain’t doing well….80 per cent of restaurants don’t even last 5 years….
7:29-
V definitely not for Vagianos! I’d happily go by my full name, but I don’t particularly like online commenting to be “Google-able” by my name.
I disagree that this photo “speaks volumes”. The data from the Walker study indicates that the “core area” near the train station is “full” on weekdays both during the day and night, and on weekends at night. I expect that is consistent with most people’s anecdotal experience as well.
Including my own family of 4, there are 20 members of my extended family that live in Ridgewood. I believe only 5 of the 20 were in town over the long weekend. Many of our own friends were out of town this weekend as well, and I don’t think an equivalent number who stayed were hosting family. That’s just one person’s experience of course. But I don’t think it’s out of line from others experience. Thanksgiving weekend is not “normal” in any way. Data like what the Walker report collected is likely much closer to “normal” parking patterns in Ridgewood.
so you saying that on the busiest shopping weekend of the year , we should not expect a full house with parking
Economics are not even Close..base Case on a New 15 m taxpayer bonding on top of all the other TAXPAYER LIABILITIES the SCHOOLS FIRE police VOR Management garbage municipal sewer etc..
Who the hell do these people think will stay and pay for these expanding taxes when inevitable restaurant recession reappears .our homes won’t sustain the rising value scale that makes this Bet of stAying here once the kids are out of college,resale values will tank..ie 15 to 18k taxes PA for a small cape..NO Way too big a bet.stop this Garage..let em walk..
James (7:35pm) –
You are right that the garage is not self-funding in isolation. The Walker report states this upfront. It also sounds like almost no municipal parking garages are self-funding in isolation. Why not? Parking in a town like Ridgewood is a “system”. There are publicly owned street spots, public owned lot spots, and privately owned lot spots. Those different types of spots “compete” with each other if you will. You can’t build a garage and charge 5x what the other spots cost and expect to make a profit. Thus no one builds a privately funded garage. This is classic market failure, transaction costs, coordination problem stuff.
But what Ridgewood can do to fund more parking is the following: 1. Raise parking rates by a reasonable amount. 2. Extend paid hours to more of the day.
So that’s what the plan does, and that’s how it will pay for the garage. From a “free market” perspective, since parking is a scarce resource, it makes sense to allocate by price and not make it free. Night parking is particularly in demand. Thus, charging for that scarce resource is a good idea.
for one socializing the risk sticking tax payers with the bill , and selected cronies ie developers and career politicians make all money is certainly not how you do it
John V. The Walker report shows that low is half empty on the weekends and ONLY at capacity at 7pm during the week…it is fairly full most of the day due to the commuters as the report suggests. Problem is, that is not where we need parking unless you only want to support those restaurants and commuters. Many will NOT park there and walk to stores farther away, say near the GAP. We will be using all the $$ and not really solving the problem imo, and be left with a too large garage that paves the way for high density housing. After the first large building is in, the case for the others will be easier to make
I will never EVER park in the garage. It will be a gigantic WART on the village’s beautiful streetscape
James (8:31pm) –
I’m no expert on Ridgewood Thanksgiving weekend traffic patterns! Any restaurant or retail owners care to comment on typical patterns? My own experience is that I’m often out of town that weekend every year. So are many of my friends and family. Just one guys experience!
Sticking with the data that’s been collected, and also many, many peoples’ personal experience, both street parking and lot parking is tough to find at night in town. I’m very surprised this is in dispute! Please feel free to drive around town on a busy Friday and see if you find fewer than 80-90% of spots full in the “core” area. (That’s apparently the minimum sufficient % of open spots necessary for it to “feel” like it’s easy to find parking.) The more data the better!
James (8:31pm) –
Agree that the risk is an issue! And also an issue that the public will 100% bear that risk. Not sure there is a feasible alternative though that could get done in near future. Are there examples from other towns where local business shared in costs? How was that setup and how did it work?
Legitimate question: anyone have data or experience on other publicly owned parking garages built in comparable downtowns to Ridgewood? How did those work out? Major cost overruns or failure to meet revenue expectations. Commuter parking like the NJ transit lot in Ramsey are not great comparables. I’m not sure other municipal buildings are great comparables other. Parking garages seem relatively “simple” from a construction perspective?
8:36pm –
Thanks for focusing on the actual data! Hopefully others will follow your lead and talk about the facts and substance. Agree that demand in the “core” area is mostly for restaurants and commuters. That’s the area with the most hours where capacity is short, and thus there is need for more spots. A garage on Hudson would definitely not serve the east end of downtown. People won’t walk that distance from the garage to the other parts of town. Thankfully the eastern end of town already has a big lot that’s never that full, I think it’s called the “Cottage Lot” in the Walker report? That seems pretty close to retail on the east side of downtown, like the Gap.
8:36pm –
Re: putting all eggs in one basket. Agree that a “big” Hudson garage will use up all extra parking garage that the town could raise. No money for other garages could be raised, since will have already raised parking rates and extended hours. I agree it would be nice to have a small garage at the N Walnut location too. I think plan was that town would give the lot to a senior housing developer, and developer would be responsible for building a garage for the town? That seems like a pretty good compromise!
8:36pm –
Re: “solving the problem”: What do you see as the problem trying to solve? I live very close to downtown on the east side of the tracks, so mostly walk to things in town. But when I do try to drive to pickup dinner or something like that, I definitely have trouble finding parking west of Oak st to the train station. Not as much trouble from n walnut to maple.
Re: “too big” and “density”: Just being transparent, I’m personally okay with more housing and bigger buildings in downtown. (I’ll be happy to go into more detail on why I have that perspective at a later date – it’s mostly due to experience of high housing cost in California.) Saying that, I definitely understand why you’d be afraid of “big” development anywhere in town. Once a big project goes in, other big projects can be complementary and make sense. I personally see that as a feature, not a bug! But if you value other things I can for sure see why you’d disagree.
Unbelievable .” I think plan was that town would give the lot to a senior housing developer, and developer would be responsible for building a garage for the town? That seems like a pretty good compromise!”
9:34pm –
Say more. Why unbelievable?
That you would believe a developer would build a parking lot for the village just so they could put senior housing in. For your information its not senior housing on Walnut St but Assisted Living with all the employees attached to it. Just as the fact are clouded for the Hudson St lot how can you say its sound like a compromise when all the fact have not been present for this so called parking garage for the public or is truly for the public or employees and visitors for the Assisted living patients
To further add to my post. I don’t know of and developer that at out of the kindness of their heart will build a parking garage exclusive for the public use other then to supply their clients with additional parking. What else would they be looking for well let see. Maybe a moratorium on property taxes or granting of variances . So where you present some good alternate facts about the parking garage on Hudson St your statement “That seems like a pretty good compromise!” with regards to Walnut St make me skeptical of your posts.
10:16pm and 10:29pm –
I did some research on the exact proposals for the N Walnut Lot. They are posted here on the village website: https://www2.ridgewoodnj.net/RedevelopNW.cfm.
That lot is part of the “N Walnut St Redevelopment Zone”. The village has solicited proposals for development of village owned land that is currently a parking lot on N Walnut St. They’ve received two proposals that would include a parking garage paid for by the developer and given to the town in exchange for the right to build the development on the town owned land. One proposal is for assisted living (not senior housing, as you note), and the other is for condos. The garage would be paid for the developer and given to the town. Not out of the kindness of their heart, but in exchange for the right to build a profitable enterprise on town-owned land. I would presume that no developer would strike such a deal without it being profitable? I agree that “incentives” might come into play with this project. Hopefully it can be constructed in such a way to be revenue-neutral for the town, rather than creating new service demand that won’t be covered by taxes (such as if there is a property tax moratorium). In addition, I’m sure there’s a minimum scale of the project that would be needed for the deal to be profitable for a developer. 60 ft height has been mentioned. I understand why some people not like that scale and oppose such heights. From my perspective, there’s always trade-offs to life and some bigger buildings are worth the benefits. Note, that I say this as someone who lives on N Walnut St, just a few blocks up from this potential large development!
Thus, I stand by statement that the proposed N Walnut project “seems like a pretty good compromise”. I will take the criticism though that there is much more detail to be presented, and that it’s possible that the detailed proposal won’t end up being a good deal. But “in theory” I like the idea of trading development rights for a “free” garage.
John v, come to the VC meeting on Wednesday