Residents warned about future parking

Below is a recent Montclair Times Letter to the Editor by our planning board member Carol Willis reviewing and warning residents about the eagerly anticipated Parking Study resulting recommendations.  The Study results are expected to be reviewed by the planning board in order to make recommendations to the Council. 

Those attending planning board meetings in recent years have heard pro-development voices claiming that less parking is required for new development and/ or that the town should provide required parking.  For the whole study go to http://www.savemontclair.org/uploads/7/5/7/8/75788479/parking-management-plan-draft.pdf.

Below is Carol’s review of recommendations for the recently completed parking study.

Subject:  Parking Management 
Regarding Nelson Nygaard’s Parking Management Plan, below I offer summary of 
their Payment In Lieu of Parking (PILOP) option:

IT’S MAGIC

THE TRICK:    MAKE ON SITE PARKING DISAPPEAR
   Offer developers opportunity that via payment of one low Payment In Lieu of Parking fee (PILOP) they can buy 100 percent freedom from burden of providing onsite parking.

The Distraction: Convince Montclair residents to wait for Township provided parking decks that will never appear.

1. The is no vacant land available on which to build the decks  
2. Parking needs will increase faster than sufficient funds can be collected.

The Dilemma:   An inadequate supply of parking spaces does not make the cars disappear.  Therefore, where will the cars be alternatively located?

The Surprise:  Streets throughout Montclair’s residential neighborhoods are the newly designated parking lots.

Part I:     Consider that even in C-1 business districts, new development will be predominately residential.  (For example, Valley and Bloom contains 262 apartments.)  Therefore, our consultant’s recommend that C-1 apartment dwellers be given a right to petition  for “Overnight Parking Permits” to park on local residential streets; one vote per dwelling unit.  The outcome of this proposal is that homeowners on residential streets (zoned at 28 dwelling units or less per acre), will be voting in competition against apartment dwellers in buildings (zoned at 55 dwelling units or more per acre).  Can basic mathematics predict the outcome?  Spoiler alert:  Homeowners always lose by a vote of 55 in favor vs. 28 against.  And, yes employee parking permits are proposed for these same residential streets.
​
Part II:  Montclair’s Future?
     Recent press reports that, 
 “at least two developments in Manhattan are asking one million dollars for a single parking spot.  Condominium developers are toting parking spaces with glossy brochures and promotional videos, marketing the small patches of concrete as luxury amenities.”  
(“Park It Here: The Premium for a Spot,” The Wall Street Journal, August 21,2015)

​Montclair residents beware.