| Author | Message | ||
     mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 653 Registered: 4-2002 |
Fred: The increase in propery values has no relationship to a persons' property tax - at least until the next reval. Also, a landlord pays the same in taxes whether the store is empty or occupied, so again, no change in property tax when one of the few rentable locations get rented. With the increase in the number of commuters in S. Orange including many non-residents has helped to cause a traffic problem. The increase in police and traffic control is directly related to the increase in the number of commuters. There has also been increased clean-up costs for the village from the increase in the litter (I know, not all the litter comes from non-residents). My point is there are costs to having a train station and having non-residents use the station. Not much to do about it, but for some it feels better to complain. For me, I will be satisfied non-residents will come back and shop or eat in the village. The elected officials (of which I am one) chose not to enforce the parking until too many started to use it. The jury is out on whether $5.00 is too much, but my guess is that in a few weeks the number of cars will be over 40 a day. Of course, if we had the land for a mall or a country club to subsidize our taxes, I am sure we would have lower taxes than a town like Livingston. Brett: S. Orange is the second busiest station on the line after Summit. The stations that shut down all had less than 100 persons a day using them. Harrison was closed for financial reaons relating to people switching to the path (before midtown direct). There are over 1,000 residents using the station. As many can see, NJ Transit is upgrading the station at great expense, so I really don't think there needs to be a concern about the station closing. Maplewood is the third busiest. I think the stations that need to be concerned are all far west of here. I know that you are just pointing out a long-term possibility but some people might get the wrong impression. | ||
| Dave Ross Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 5295 Registered: 5-2001  |
Even at the next reval taxes wouldn't automatically "go up", as a reval is a zero-sum-gain (or whatever the phrase is); rather, the taxes would be redistributed. If it is shown that properties near the train increased disproportionately in relation to, say, the Newstead area, then people in Newstead would pay lower taxes and those near the train, higher. I don't see this happening. In Maplewood the reval was a real problem because the town is a lot larger geographically and the Hilton section didn't see the Midtown Direct benefits as strongly. Of course, I might be wrong. | ||
| fred block Citizen Username: Zachary2 Post Number: 28 Registered: 1-2003 |
Mrosner: SO will become more of a destination for shopping and dining once the redevelopment is completed. It seems that it has taken quite a bit of time. The non-SO commuters will linger after work and return on weekends to SO once there are places to shop at and dine in. These same non-SO commuters will also pass along the message to their friends about SO which will attract additional customers, thereby making downtown SO a thriving place. However, the appearance of vacant abandoned places does not help. At what point will the jury (SO) decide whether the $5 is too much? If 40 cars per day are using the lot then I will be the first to congratuate you on the charge. I for one, will not park there since it is much higher than the other spots in town unless there are no other spots available. Be careful what you wish for. Livingston residents were extremely opposed to the building of Livingston Mall and would love to have it demolished. | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 654 Registered: 4-2002 |
Fred: I am not hoping for a mall, just the revenue. Dave: You are right, I was just trying to point out that property value increases have nothing to do with a property tax increase. | ||
| nwyave Citizen Username: Mesh Post Number: 113 Registered: 1-2003 |
FBlock: I am missing the point. Firstly, where else is there to park legally? All the other lots are permit lots or have meters which for somebody travelling to NYC would not work out. The only other alternative are parking in blocks that are already not so close to the train station or areas such the Baird Center that have very limited parking. I think the $5 rate is a very fair rate ($100/mo) to park near the train station, have guaranteed parking and get the benefits of a direct train to NYC - and at the same time not paying SO taxes. With regard to SO residents, I think a lower rate of $3 would be fair. I have gone by the parking lot recently and while it is not full, it is getting a decent amount of spots utilized. Even if it is not 40 spots, I think over time it will grow to that and there should be no rush to change it. A $100 per mo for the benefits of a guaranteed spot near the train station in a town that one does not live in, is not a bad deal at all. | ||
| bobk Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 3478 Registered: 5-2001 |
I think it is a myth that commuters are going to stop on their way home to shop. Earlier this week, for the first time in memory, I stopped in downtown MW to shop on my way home from the station. Usually, exiting the commuter parking lots resembles the start of the 24 Hours of LeMans!! In addition, many downtown stores close by six, before most commuters make it home. On another subject, Dave is correct that a reassessment or revaluation is, as we property tax wonks call it is, a “zero sum game”. The revaluation process just shifts the revenue sources around, unless, of course, the local government looks on this as a chance to sneak through a tax increase in the hopes nobody will notice, which was the case in MW in 2000. | ||
| fred block Citizen Username: Zachary2 Post Number: 29 Registered: 1-2003 |
nwyave: In answer to your question, there are 12 hour meter spots located near the train station, which works out to $3 per day. This was my point all along that the Shop Rite lot should be the same as the meter spots. You are right, that street parking will require at least a 5 block walk to the station but I am sure some commuters will do this instead of paying $5 per day. It will remain to be seen if the lot will reach 40 cars. I did hear from a fellow commuter that the Mountain Station daily lot was full quite early today, which means that some commuters are going there and paying (I believe) $2 per day. $100 per month is almost double the price of $55 per month in the transit lot and the meter spots. Accordingly, I believe that price is excessive. You are right, SO should charge less to its own residents to park in a SO owned lot. Bobk: It is not a myth that commuters will shop downtown. Maybe they will not shop everyday, but they will return after observing the changes around town and sometimes shop after work. Retail stores may close early but usually some nights they stay open and if they promote themselves then people will come. You are right that revaluation is generally a zero sum game. However, as proven in Maplewood, the town officials will try to sneak in tax increase. A revaluation should also provide a somewhat even tax burden to homeowners who have older homes and homeowners who have newer homes. | ||
| nwyave Citizen Username: Mesh Post Number: 115 Registered: 1-2003 |
Fblock: How can you compare 12 spots at $3 to a whole lot at $5? Seems like the desire to save $2 could leave most people without a spot. Comparing to 12 spots is like saying there are no other spots. Comparing to Mountain station is not a reasonable comparison either. As I am sure you know, there is only 1 Midtown direct train each way that stops at this station. I believe that it more than a 5 block walk from the nearest residential street to the station and I am sure the BOT (rightfully so) will address a situation that arises where too many commuters park on such a street - that was already done on Tillou. With re. the NJ Transit lot cost - there is a 2 year wait there. Sure it is cheaper, but one has to wait 2 years. In the meantime, while one is on the list, I would think that $100 lot is better than nothing - or on some mornings nothing. | ||
| fred block Citizen Username: Zachary2 Post Number: 30 Registered: 1-2003 |
nwyave: I believe there are more than 12 spots available at meters. Where are you counting only 12 spots? I am aware of the limited service at Mountain Station but I also know that some commuters switch at Broad St. for the Midtown Direct train. I was not aware of the situation on Tillou (is that off Ridgewood?). What exactly happened on Tillou? It seems like a long walk from there. It remains to be seen if $100 per month is too much. I think you should be more concern when the parking lot is closed for construction and all the new construction takes more spaces. | ||
| paddy Citizen Username: Paddy Post Number: 135 Registered: 5-2001 |
Bottom line, the town needs more metered parking. My wife and I try to leave together as much as possible, but I need to leave very early now. So she tries to park near the library (the lot and the adjacent street) yesterday morning and every single spot was taken. So as I suspected, people have started to balk at the $5, and my wife had no where to park. 2-hour Parking is allowed on Church street (that is the street parrallel to the station?), I think. Can't we install meters there on one-side? I don't recall alot of residences there, mostly apartments and storefronts. I can't believe some people think $100 a month is actually reasonable. What's the Maplewood annual permit, like $100?!?! Anyone who thinks that $1200 a year is OK has unfortunately been conditioned by the NJ machine into believing that overpaying for everything is OK. Please don't point out Summit. Those people who pay to Park in Summit live in Bernardsville, or Far Hills, and make a whole lot more than I do every year. I pay enough to live in this lovely town. Just give me the opportunity to park my car, work and pay those taxes. | ||
| fred block Citizen Username: Zachary2 Post Number: 31 Registered: 1-2003 |
Paddy: Your point is excellent, especially for SO residents. Why not open the Shop Rite lot just for SO residents and charge $3 per day? This would provide an accurate reading for SO to determine how many residents will use the lot. If there are only a handful then open the lot to the rest of the non-SO commuters. This can be done without much effort by requiring the SO resident to produce their driver license as they pay. Also, issue resident parking stickers to park on the street. Any car that does not have a resident parking sticker would not be allowed to park on the street near the train station. | ||
| vermontgolfer Citizen Username: Vermontgolfer Post Number: 94 Registered: 12-2002 |
Fred, SO tell me what does the town tell all the SO residents who you suggest park at Shop Rite to do once construction starts. I have to confess, while I'm fairly new to MOL, it seems that you may have set a record for posts on something that, while important, you've made into a monster. By the way, if Livingston Mall was ever demolished I'd sure like to see how the residents react to their tax increase once it wasn't there. Good Parking!  | ||
| fred block Citizen Username: Zachary2 Post Number: 32 Registered: 1-2003 |
vermontgolfer: My intent was not to create a record of postings regarding this matter. My hope was that some of the SO officials would at least reconsider the parking fee accessed at the Shop Rite lot. It appears that I may have touched a sensitive nerve among some of the posters on this site. My point about the Livingston Mall is that many residents in Livingston find it an eyesore and would love a different commercial establishment more long the lines of a Short Hills mall. | ||
| vermontgolfer Citizen Username: Vermontgolfer Post Number: 95 Registered: 12-2002 |
Fred, While I love living in SO and have done so for over 20 years, I would like to see our officials find a way to lower our taxes, I just don't think charging $5 to park in the Shop Rite lot is the answer. While I couldn't agree that the Short Hills Mall has a more pleasing look, I honestly don't consider Livingston an eyesore, sorry thread drift! | ||
| algebra2 Citizen Username: Algebra2 Post Number: 1251 Registered: 5-2001  |
bobk -- I park a short walk from the Maplewood train station and stop and do my shopping in town almost every day. I run through Kings or buy a sandwich at Cravings or pick up a video. I have friends who live in WO and park where I do and they do all of there shopping in Maplewood. Do stores in SO really close at 6:00? | ||
| fred block Citizen Username: Zachary2 Post Number: 33 Registered: 1-2003 |
algebra2: Maplewood is not SO and SO is not Maplewood. SO does not have a downtown supermarket or the quaint downtown that Maplewood has although we are lead to believe that SO is trying to redevelop downtown to become as appealing as Maplewood. | ||
| Marc Citizen Username: Bautisma Post Number: 5 Registered: 9-2003 |
Fred: Besides a supermarket what types of stores would you like to see downtown in SO? | ||
| fred block Citizen Username: Zachary2 Post Number: 34 Registered: 1-2003 |
marc: Let me begin with what I would like to see less of: Nail salons, fastfood restaurants. | ||
| chocoholic Citizen Username: Shrink Post Number: 26 Registered: 2-2003 |
I'm not Marc but I would like to respond to the question. I think that a Barnes and Nobles would be a gigantic hit. Also, a real Gourmet supermarket, a la Fairway in NYC. | ||
| mayhewdrive Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 412 Registered: 5-2001 |
uh, oh....Thread drift! Fred - don't forget fewer Beauty Supply stores & Dry Cleaners Chocoholic - I totally agree. Also more GOOD restaurants (Thai, a GOOD sit-down chinese, cafes, etc - all with OUTDOOR seating |
