the staff of the Ridgewood blog
Ridgewood NJ, It seems that many who voted YES, voted ‘yes” for more parking. More parking yes , but not a monstrosity of a parking high-rise building being proposed for the Hudson Street parking lot. Many feel they were misled into thinking that a particular design had not been decided upon, even though this giant megastructure was the only option that was ever, in reality, on the table.
Everyone is quite aware of the peak demand parking shortage in our Village. The above is an image of what the proposed garage would look like. As you can see if dwarfs all the surrounding buikdings. If this monstrosity of a garage is not what you signed up for, when you voted YES for parking, please attend this Wednesdays Village Council meeting and let the Mayor and members of the Village Council know that this mega garage may work for Hackensack or Ft Lee but definitely does not fit in to the character of our Village. Furthermore, plans for any garage should be held off until the 4 impact studies are concluded. What is the point of having impact studies on traffic, etc… if our Village Council pushes through this huge garage.
Good Commentary. So many negative Impacts to Village . Will also set off a series of Urbanization
Developments , impacting Traffic flow ; Schools and Two major Churches in that small Area.
That encroaches so far into the roadway. How will there be two lanes? What if one of those cars is oversized (as so many in town are), a truck or otherwise oversized vehicle? Scary with all the elderly and children who will be in the area for our church. Have they tested the new traffic pattern or narrowed roadways?
How many time are the residents going to be tricked by the 3 Amigos? Whats it going to take?
Although I think we passed the point a long time ago, it’s got to the point where the “Village” of Ridgewood has become an absurd title.
So you’re interpreting what the yes vote meant. Judging by the turnout, it appears that enough people understood the potential impact to pass the non binding referendum. Opponents are now saying voters didn’t “understand” the referendum. Yes it took a little reading but if “misinformed” voters were taken out of the equation it still would have passed. That’s my interpretation. It is patronizing and arrogant to assume that people that didn’t vote your way must not understand the implications of their respective vote.
2 questions perhaps someone will answer:
1. we would be eliminating on street parking on Hudson along with the existing parking on the lot, so what is the incremental parking net of what is being lost? 300 spaces?
2. It seems that an incremental 300 spaces (which will go largely unused most of the time) for $15 MM is a crazy expense. That’s a capital cost of $50k per incremental parking space. That seems like an insane investment to me. Has anyone done an analysis of the true investment return here for the Village?
10:47am-
1. Yes, ~300 net new spaces after counting the existing spaces in that lot and the elimination of the existing street parking spaces.
2. Garage would certainly be cheaper if they just made it “ugly”. I don’t think we want that. Also, the garage does not pay for itself in isolation. To pay for the garage, parking rates and paid hours must be raised around the town. This is typical for municipally-financed garages. If assumptions hold true, the revenue raised by the whole parking system will be enough to pay for the garage and generate the same surplus as is currently generated. Full details in the “Walker Report” commissioned by the town: https://mods.ridgewoodnj.net/pdf/manager/2015walkerFinal.pdf
“Tuesday’s referendum question is ONLY asking residents support financing and building a garage on the Hudson Street lot. Nothing more. Nothing less. You Will NOT be voting on the size, look or other aspect of a proposed parking deck.” Mayor Paul Aronsohn
Paul Smith – I agree with the mayor about the meaning of the yes vote. Nothing more, nothing less.
Exactly- the non binding referendum was about the financing to build a garage. There were no specifics on size or shape but talked about a NET addition of appx 300 spaces and no negative impact on property taxes. It’s on the public domain for all to see.
@1:09, the council has indicated one of the times they will not increase meter hours will be Saturday night as to not penalize church attendees. This has the problem of also missing out on revenue from the most profitable meter night (saturday) and impacts the projections from the Walker Report.
Let’s not forget also that most of those spots will go to commuters who will lose the parking from Ken Smith and Brogan.
the new ridgewood,
Parking revenue is supposed to help defray property taxes. Now that will never happen, and both property taxes and parking fees will go up. How much of the $$ in stolen quarters has been returned?
Right @2:26, and don’t forget that the plan is to eliminate carry over on the meter. So running into Dunkin Donuts or UPS you will pay every time. Will people choose to tack on .75 or 1.00 to buy in Ridgewood daily or just go to Midland Park or Glen Rock the way I do…
12 mill plus overruns always expected so even at 14 million we are getting an Olympic Sized eyesore that will begin the unwinding of that Neighborhood which is currently a nice unique Cafe setting into a Slum..Nice Move Ridgewood..what a scam..
Could you even get a hook and ladder around that corner once your reverse that street coming in from ridgewood avenue side?.
They are stripping width from that Tight street to outbuild the Structure up on top of a confiscated sidewalk there today..to that corner…also what happens if there are accidents or breakdowns there
Say by a truck or large municipal vehicle..near 2 large churches and Schools around the block..bad design..too big for site and citizen and community safety.
Do people understand that the design literally steals 10 feet of the current 30-foot width to use for the garage–i.e., one third? Street could never become two ways again without tearing down garage. And that doesn’t even count the cantilevered piece, under which I shall NEVER walk.
Village….Yea Right.
The photograph is ONE BIG LIE. The garage will be built over the sidewalk but will not narrow the street. Plus the size of the garage has been distorted. Have you no shame?
Thanks for the post Comrade Halaby
POLITICAL power in Soviet Russia ( Village of Ridgewood) is not divided and is delegated only in respect to minor matters; it rests firmly concentrated in the hands of one small group, the steering committee, or “Politbureau,” of the Central Committee of the Communist Party.( The 3 Amigos)
Rurik at 5:39pm –
I’m pretty sure you’re incorrect (and I say this as someone who supports the project). Here is the pdf from the village website, where the photo was screencapped from: https://mods.ridgewoodnj.net/pdf/manager/2015simdeck.pdf
Here is the exact Google Street View image that the rendering was created from:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.9787353,-74.1190759,3a,37.5y,272.34h,87.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7kdyYhDVxgMWZWvJOEOSRA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
What you can see is that where the cars are currently parked along the street will be replaced by the sidewalk with the overhang. Thus, the street will technically be “narrowed”, but it presumably will have the same driveable width since there will no longer be street parking on either side.
Rurik – can you post actual renderings of what the 5 story garage would look like from this angle? Since there is no agreed upon design yet, I am curious to see if/how the largest garage (and that is what it is) it will impact the street. Thanks.
Mr. Halaby, If you are suggesting those images have been altered then you should take it up with our village manager. That image is from our own Village Website and has not been altered at all. SHAME on YOU for even suggesting it.
Rurik at 5:39pm-
Also, you are doing a disservice to those who support the garage and other developments in town by resorting to such moralizing (“big lie”, “shame”). Leave that moralizing to the other side. Better to stick to the facts and be an honest broker in correcting misinformation from both sides. These things fundamentally come down to value judgments: aesthetics vs. economics, growth vs. stability, etc. Reasonable people can have views on both sides. The commenters on this blog too often resort to ad hominem attacks, misinformation, exaggeration, etc. Leave that to them and take the high ground.
Rurik, an educated man like yourself must have had the same reaction to the minimized images utilized to sell the garage to the voters, but where was your outrage? I suggest that anyone who knows how to use Google Earth to search for Yogi Berra Drive in Montclair. The identical 5-story garage proposed for Hudson Street already exists there on the campus of Montclair State College. It is enormous.
Here is the report from Maser (village hired) https://mods.ridgewoodnj.net/pdf/manager/2015traffichudson.pdf look at the site plan on page 3. You can clearly see where the current curb is, and where the future curb will be (10ft out). Towards the bottom of the site plan, where the length of the garage ends (272ft), you can see the curve of the road as it goes back to it’s 30ft width.
John V. You are right in that we should stick to facts but then you list a “value judgement as aesthetics vs. economics?” Something can be aesthetically pleasing, in step with the community and make good economic sense. Must it be ugly and overbearing to make economic sense? The architect said if around 80 spots were lost from the largest garage, the street would not need to be narrowed. Why is that not a consideration?
Furthermore,, you know what happens when you tax an activity? same thing that happened when rates were raised the last time and the COC begged for reduction in hours…
John V. is back! “The commenters on this blog too often resort to ad hominem attacks, misinformation, exaggeration,”
I see from your comment John V that you took the high ground.
Hey Edward Feldsott I seem to remember at one council meeting you stood up at the public comment section and said that Paul Aronsohn was the only one on the Council that cares about Ridgewood. Hows that working out for you?
Does anyone believe a word Hallaby says? I find it best to smile and look the other way rather than engage him, just as you would with anyone else whose deck is obviously missing a few cards.
Just look at the picture on this post. It’s the same picture from the architect that is on the village web-site. It is clear that the road narrows when you get to the garage. Look at the cars. They do not line up. Look at the width. It is significantly narrower than down by the Vacuum store
Image of parking garage still looks like a prison with a guard tower.
Yes 7:13 If the garage fails. The turncoat Sheriff will ask his Democratic handlers to make it a jail. Maybe be thats the county plan all along.
Not hearing much from the Council majority lemmings that were posting all over “It Takes a Ridgewood Village” now. What do you all have to say for yourselves? We’ve all been had.
7:24 watch what you say about the Sheriff, he may send some of his thugs to the meeting. Fortunately the cameras will be rolling.
the Council majority lemmings are saving themselves for Albert and Gwen re-election and their bid for Mayor and Deputy Mayor
656 it narrows but the drive path is the same as spots on the other side of the street are removed. The voters approved bonding for the building of a garage.
John V – as a newcomer in town you sure have a lot of nerve painting all the blog contributors with a negative broad brush. Posters on this blog are long-time residents who care passionately about this town and about all the damage that this trio has done and is continuing to do. Rurik Halaby is the most uncivil nasty resident in town. He has vicious outbursts at residents, calling them names, practically growling at people during meetings. He is downright scary at times. Do not even engage him in any conversation, not on the blog and definitely not in person.
Rurik, you are pitiful with your shouting and screaming. This is an image that came from Village Hall.
831– I think it’s people that disagree with the noisy MINORITY have a lot of nerve in your eyes- Halaby has his opinions and is unafraid to put his name on it, whether in the paper, on this blog or council meetings. I welcome people like John V to take on the luddites in this town in a civil manner.
6:47 –
Re: aesthetics, I completely agree! These are all trade-offs on the margin, but they are not binary. There are certainly can be happy mediums that leave most people pleased.
The challenge on this garage is that the lot is a big narrow. So to maximize spaces per floor, they pushed it out on to Hudson st. That’s what gives the 400 spot garage, and the lowest cost per space. You could knock a floor off and decrease the footprint, but you’d probably end up with a 240 space garage. So that would be half as many net new spots, but it certainly wouldn’t cost half as much. So that’s the trade-off here!
6:47-
Re: high ground, I do take the high ground! Hopefully everyone here has found my comments fact-based, honest, and civil. Same with my comments on the Facebook groups.
I said that “too many” commenters on this site aren’t living up to those standards. Even 5% of commenters would be too many! I stand by my statement. It’s not hard to find comments on this blog that are “personal stacks” above all.
Bonding and building of a garage…not this garage. It was non binding. The council is required to pass by 4-1 or ridgewood does not float the bond. Guess what Paul is planning next? Going around our own council to Bergen county who will then take complete ownership of it all. What a slap in the face to all residents and our village government.
8:31-
Thanks for your comment. Please don’t take my criticisms the wrong way. I wasn’t trying to paint a broad brush, just a fine brush. I said “too many” commenters are behaving badly. I didn’t put a number on that. Even 5% is too many! For example,
take the commenters use of the word “lemmings” on many comments in this thread. That’s an inherently pejorative word, and shuts down discussion. It’s name-calling basically. It distracts from the real substance of issues. (I am trying to avoid words like NIMBY in my own arguments for similar reasons.)
I appreciate many of the long-time residents and commenters here. It’s good to get varied perspectives.
If Rurik Halaby behaves as described, I agree with the recommendation to avoid him. I don’t respect or support such behavior, even from someone who might agree with me on the issues.
As a Ridgewood resident the renderings look like a very tall non confirming building to satisfy long term commuter traffic that lines the pocket of the town and does not address the intent of a parking garage for quick down town shopping and eating. If the measurements are accurate none of the nj buses that speed through the streets will fit and will cause traffic issues. Not to mention the danger of speeding and frustrated commuters from the city that do not watch how they exit from the garage. To exist larger than the crest of a church is disgraceful.
Well, I see that G.M. and Lyft will work on developing an on-demand network of self-driving cars, an area of research that companies like Google, Tesla and Uber have all devoted enormous resources to in recent years…. in ten years people won’t own their own cars to commute, they’ll just get an uber or a lyft which will be far cheaper than paying for the annual depreciation on a car that you only drive for a fraction of the day… cars are a terrible investment, so why the need for a monstrous parking garage if no one will drive their own cars in 10 years? Also, think about it – if you plan to drink during your night out in the Village, you won’t drive either if you can just get an uber or lyft… this garage will be the white elephant of white elephants… that money would be FAR better spent on something else like a PAC where the current Ridgewood municipal garage is located.
John V, the Walker report is full of BS and widely aggressive assumptions, please stop referencing it. The fact is that the parking garage will pull away revenues from other Village needs, and the cost overruns to build this unnecessary garage will be outrageous – as they always are in NJ. The Village engineer couldn’t build a corn hole toss game without excessive change orders, delays, and 30% cost overruns versus the sanctioned budget. The garage funding will be a Village taxpayer nightmare for a decade, and Paul and Albert should be ashamed of themselves for pandering to CBD big wigs…
300 plus car garage so people can go to a restuarant in Ridgewood on a Friday or Saturday night. I wonder if Rurik and John V., and other people who support this bad joke, really thought about this from that standpoint because that is all this garage is being built for.
Agreed Bill H., this is an unnecessary waste of money… what a mistake.
7:26am-
What specific assumptions in the Walker report do you believe are BS and/or widely aggressive? If you’ve got evidence that the report is unrealistic, I’d be happy to stop referencing it.
However, until I see otherwise, I’m going to continue to reference the report. It is the only study I’ve seen that has data on parking demand downtown, and also the only financial projections we have.