Skip to content

Council Meeting Of November 6, 2019


  1. Guest wrote:

    Mr. Cramer and others voices are falling on deaf ears regarding the outdoor dining / building expansion of Flames Restaurant at 10th and Main Street. Not only is it a favored discount watering hole for the administration, but look down just 2 posts on this blog to see that the 2 Councilman just 2 days ago held their victory party there.

    Thursday, November 7, 2019 at 10:21 am | Permalink
  2. anonymous- wrote:

    So What

    Thursday, November 7, 2019 at 11:13 am | Permalink
  3. So…. should the administration continue looking the other way while Flames proceeds to take over more & more of the sidewalk at 10th & Main?

    Thursday, November 7, 2019 at 11:28 am | Permalink
  4. Katrina wrote:

    When you say look the other way, what does that mean? It is my understanding Codes enforcement went and gave Flames the permit after measuring the space.
    As far as using an in town establishment for a party, what’s wrong with that? Should our elected officials go outside of their own town or utilize and encourage our businesses? I’m really at a loss as to why so many anonymous people on this blog love to spread rumors and innuendo. Go to meetings, reveal who you are, ask questions openly.
    Oh and by the way I was at the “ victory party” having never been to Flames before. It was quite nice and I intend to bring family and friends there.

    Thursday, November 7, 2019 at 2:06 pm | Permalink
  5. Guest wrote:

    #4 – You were ok with the lack of sidewalk space there this summer? It was very difficult for some older residents to maneuver around the area.

    Thursday, November 7, 2019 at 3:52 pm | Permalink
  6. Belle wrote:

    Maybe the town should revisit its sidewalk ordinance? If the town now realizes that the size of the space allowed by the current ordinance isn’t reasonable or large enough, maybe they can put together a well thought out one that would be more appropriate and give more room for pedestrians. It just takes common sense to see there isn’t enough room on the sidewalk to allow for tables, awnings, poles, traffic light poles, foot traffic, flower planters and so on.

    Thursday, November 7, 2019 at 4:58 pm | Permalink
  7. Family Guy wrote:

    I found it difficult to navigate a baby stroller through that area.

    Thursday, November 7, 2019 at 5:43 pm | Permalink
  8. OLD MAN wrote:

    #I can’t walk around the damn sidewalk and feel save. Neither dems or reps give a damn about the people. Do you have friends to bring there? I heard you are frend less Uh duh

    Thursday, November 7, 2019 at 6:07 pm | Permalink
  9. Tom Dilberger wrote:

    Pretty much, it’s clear we just traded one set of jerks for another last year. They don’t care about the citizenry and things will continue to get worse people finally understand in full they’re being cheated by the local governmental cabal.

    Thursday, November 7, 2019 at 6:38 pm | Permalink
  10. Belmartian wrote:

    Old man. Your comments are stooping. Go take an aspirin.

    Thursday, November 7, 2019 at 6:41 pm | Permalink
  11. Katrina wrote:

    #6. Maybe it IS time to reevaluate those ordinances. It does seem tight at Flames. Not sure what if anything can be done about them in particular now.
    But it’s a nice restaurant with nice proprietors and an asset to the town. That’s just my opinion. The awning really doesn’t bother me but I understand how those with disabilities could find it tough to get around.

    Thursday, November 7, 2019 at 8:25 pm | Permalink
  12. OLD MAN wrote:

    #10 Feel better now making fun of an old man.
    I can’t walk around the damn thing. To old. They should tear it down.

    Friday, November 8, 2019 at 4:31 am | Permalink
  13. OLD MAN wrote:

    #10 Hope you feel better for mocking me. I can’t get around the damn flame place. You have zero respect for the older people that live here in Belmar. Myabe some day you will get old. For now try and have some compassion for us old folks. Now I’ll take a few aspirins

    Friday, November 8, 2019 at 4:38 am | Permalink
  14. puckered sphincter wrote:

    #10 & 11 – can’t we all just get along?

    Friday, November 8, 2019 at 5:56 am | Permalink
  15. Belmartian wrote:

    Old man. My comment to you was directed at you saying Katrina is friendless which I thought was a low blow. Nothing to do with Flames or your age. I feel fine, thanks.

    Friday, November 8, 2019 at 5:57 am | Permalink
  16. eugene creamer wrote:

    ADA compliance @ 10th & Main is important … street traffic safety is more important.

    Belmar zoning code requires a 25 foot sight triangle on corner lots…

    40-7.5 Sight Triangle at Intersections.

    Unless more stringent regulations are provided by other provisions of this chapter, at the intersection of two (2) or more streets, no hedge, fence, screening strip or wall higher than thirty (30″) inches above curb level, nor any obstruction to vision, other than a post not exceeding one (1) foot in diameter, shall be permitted on any lot within the triangular area formed by two (2) intersecting street lines bounding said lot, or the projection of such lines, and by a line connecting a point, on each line located twenty-five (25′) feet from the intersection of the street lines. (Ord. No. 1992-32 § 7.5)

    Friday, November 8, 2019 at 6:58 am | Permalink
  17. OLD MAN wrote:

    #15 I have a cardioligist appointment today

    Friday, November 8, 2019 at 7:55 am | Permalink
  18. Guest wrote:

    16. Thank you Mr. Creamer for attempting to keep them honest. Unfortunately this batch seems to have already been influenced.

    Friday, November 8, 2019 at 8:07 am | Permalink
  19. out of site wrote:

    #16 Well that appears to mean that the Flames structure is in violation. I know people in town that have had to cut down their hedges on corner properties due to the ordinance Mr Creamer posted. It would seem that the Flames structure interferes with the lines described above.
    In other news, while either set of candidates is free to host their election night gathering at any place they want, the political optics of holding such a celebration at an establishment that some townspeople are upset with, are not great. To some, it suggests the appearance of impropriety. There most likely is NO IMPROPRIETY but, unfortunately, there is the appearance. With the divisiveness in Belmar currently and the years of Matt’s improper relationships with, well…anyone with a fat wallet, it probably a good time to err on the side of caution. A good rule of thumb would be to think, ‘what would Matt Doherty do?’ and do the exact opposite. Katrina, I am not saying that Mark or any of the council members are engaged in anything remotely close to what Matt did. I am only saying that we’re still healing from those 7.5 years of abuse and therefore the current administration needs to by hyper-conscious of anything that could be construed as favoritism.
    I do like Flames and I think it is a great establishment for the town. I’d hate to be the one that has to tell them that the structure needs to come down.

    Old Man- It seems like Belmartian was only responding to your unprovoked, unnecessary, and rather personal attack on Katrina.

    Friday, November 8, 2019 at 8:10 am | Permalink
  20. ms.nobody wrote:

    On the night of October 24th I walked past Flames around 9:45 P.M. and heard LOUD foul rap type music blaring out onto the street. In fact I heard the “noise” at least a block away from there from the south. I don’t care so much for being politically correct or not, but that was offensive to me. Nasty and loud. That killed my idea of its being a classy joint.

    Friday, November 8, 2019 at 8:48 am | Permalink
  21. Appearance wrote:

    #19 – You think there is an action that could be taken that won’t upset people? Would be nice, but impossible. Look at this blog. No one wins.

    Politicians have to be careful but they also have to be out in the world. In the case of the latter, they’ll get roasted by people on this blog, no matter what they do.

    Friday, November 8, 2019 at 9:08 am | Permalink
  22. Kudos wrote:

    #21 – Thank you! People who frequent this blog and comment will never be happy! If the council would respond and crack down on every complaint, bar and establishment that is complained about on this blog there would be no businesses left in town and they would still find stuff to bitch and complain about. Smile sometimes people, we live in a great town, with great people and Matt no longer has influence over anything. Be happy

    Friday, November 8, 2019 at 9:53 am | Permalink
  23. Anonymous wrote:

    It’s a given, Flames has great food and service. Unfortunately, the owner allows his unsophisticated staff to control the selection of music inside and outside on the public street. Often, the volume is cranked up to ear bleeding levels and, quite frankly, it sucks. Complaining helps! Why pay $40 and not be able to talk? The psychology is to make you drink more and eat less. Could be the Djais model?

    Friday, November 8, 2019 at 10:06 am | Permalink
  24. ms.nobody wrote:

    It is true that is impossible to make everybody happy and some people will always complain about something. That being said, the matter of appearance is interesting, for example, if a person is a minister of the gospel and is seen in a restaurant enjoying a beer or drinking wine, someone will notice that and think that minister is a hypocrite and not true to whatever he or she may stand for. So what is a person to do, become overly sensitive to what others may observe and form opinions about or just do what they want, within reason, result be damned? What offends me may be perfectly fine for someone else. An open forum is a place for opinions, griping included.

    Friday, November 8, 2019 at 10:55 am | Permalink
  25. anon wrote:

    #16, your observation is well taken. Street safety should be a, if not the primary, concern when code enforcement [?] reviews plans that impact public sidewalks,streets and intersections. I cannot speak to whether Flames violates 40-7.5 but if it does someone did not do their job and needs to be called out on it. Forget the personal gripes, if they are out of compliance and the town nevertheless approved it you have a hazard and liability potential.

    Friday, November 8, 2019 at 1:02 pm | Permalink
  26. Let it Go wrote:

    #21 & #22 Are 110% correct there is no pleasing everyone and unfortunately alot of people are of the mind set their way or no way, with no compromising and they shut their minds to even understanding or listening. Their minds are made up and there is no changing them.
    Unfortunately for the whole community posts similar to above that are based on assumptions and not backed up with the ACTUAL facts, starts the rumor wheel and tarnishes alot of people, that are doing their jobs, are following the procedures and are doing the right things. Because they are so indignant they continue to repeat their assertions based on assumptions not facts and others may read this and not realize that. To use Flames as an example because it is a constant target, notwithstanding other establishments with similar set ups that get no mention. Flames presented the proper documents, applications, professional plans, the Borough conducted their inspections, the Police department reviewed same, Borough officials gave them permits, etc……The process was not quick for Flames, you may note that they didnt even start construction until half way through the summer notwithstanding their application and documents were presented to the Borough way before. They sat and waited the system just like any other applicant no special treatment, it cost them most if not all of the summer for out door dining. To sum it up it appears the rules and protocols were followed in this situation believe it or not, but you can go down and verify it if you like. I do not believe the people who are asserting violations are occurring and things should be torn down did any due diligence before making their assertions.
    I suggest for the people that do not like flames and their outdoor dining or do not feel like they can get around the pole, go to the crosswalk and walk on the other side of the street and LET IT GO.

    Friday, November 8, 2019 at 4:33 pm | Permalink
  27. Bill merkler wrote:

    I just want to say our Main St. looks amazing, thank you to whoever came up with the idea and design.It is elegant and just what our Main st. needed/ Makes my day to see it on my way home from work. Thank you!

    Friday, November 8, 2019 at 6:15 pm | Permalink
  28. Anonymous wrote:

    #27. I totally agree! I love it!

    Friday, November 8, 2019 at 7:54 pm | Permalink
  29. OLD MAN wrote:

    #27 Looks great plenty of empty stores on main. South main is horrible. #26 let it go? I can’t get by there. Not fair to pld people.

    Saturday, November 9, 2019 at 5:32 am | Permalink
  30. Tom Dilberger wrote:

    A couple of things. First, Flames is out of whack. While they might be within code, it just shows the code has to be changed. But our inexperienced mayor and council will not do it. Second, I agree that the decorations look good. However, in that we should be running on an extreme financial austerity budget, it’s just more money we don’t have flushed down the toilet. That’s what you get when inexperienced people are put in office.

    Saturday, November 9, 2019 at 6:57 am | Permalink
  31. Solar incentives wrote:

    Have Belmar Electric UNPLUG during the daylight. Electricity is expensive.

    Saturday, November 9, 2019 at 8:38 am | Permalink
  32. Tom Dilberger wrote:

    Obama asks Marines for umbrellas – YouTube › watch

    A bit off subject but I think this guy should be our next mayor (It was a real treat watching this).

    Video for Obama asks Marines for umbrellas 0:48

    May 16, 2013 – Uploaded by CNN
    Pres. Barack Obama called up the assistance of the Marines when it began to rain heavily in the Rose Garden …

    Saturday, November 9, 2019 at 10:33 am | Permalink
  33. Belmar Electric wrote:

    Maser the gift that keeps on giving

    Saturday, November 9, 2019 at 1:24 pm | Permalink
  34. Resident wrote:

    I agree, the lights do look good at night but should be turned off during the day to save money and energy.

    Saturday, November 9, 2019 at 4:14 pm | Permalink
  35. Safe sidewalks wrote:

    #16 – Do you know if the intersection near 10th & railroad ave, the southeast corner near the new condo building also violates the code? Or how I can find out that information? It seems very difficult to cross because the building is blocking the view of cars headed north on that one way street. Thank you.

    Saturday, November 9, 2019 at 9:09 pm | Permalink
  36. Tired Resident wrote:

    Speaking of the Depeepee building at 10th and railroad. I want to ask the mayor, council, BA, when will there be a sign put up notifying the public that there are 20 something parking spots allotted for the public in the parking garage? Or is this another scam to the public that will be swept under the carpet? Didn’t we give him that prime property for next to nothing. Mayor, answer please?

    Sunday, November 10, 2019 at 5:46 am | Permalink
  37. eugene creamer wrote:

    #35 … Belmar’s zoning code doesn’t apply to redevelopers in ‘areas in need of redevelopment’

    Sunday, November 10, 2019 at 9:16 am | Permalink
  38. Ms. B wrote:

    #36 Sign is a great idea. However if you’d like to address the mayor, council and BA might I suggest attending the next council meeting. I can assure you they don’t read this blog and will not see this.

    Sunday, November 10, 2019 at 10:26 am | Permalink
  39. Mr.A wrote:

    Ms. B, I would be willing to bet you a nickel that the mayor, council and administrator read this blog.

    Sunday, November 10, 2019 at 2:59 pm | Permalink
  40. Days gone by wrote:

    #32. Thanks for the video recommendation. Loved it. It is such a bittersweet feeling seeing a president that is honest, kind, smart, articulate, and even funny. It’s is so painful to watch the current occupant of the White House. Draft dodging, dishonest, inarticulate, misogynist, cowardly ignoramus. Anytime I see footage of past presidents, I am nostalgic for a time when we had presidents that were actually presidential. Thanks Tom for the tip.

    Sunday, November 10, 2019 at 9:10 pm | Permalink
  41. OLD MAN wrote:

    Won’t be hearing from me anymore. Sold my house and moving to Neptune. My son ,CPA, said it was a good idea. Just renting for now. Good bye and best of luck

    Monday, November 11, 2019 at 4:11 am | Permalink
  42. admin wrote:

    You don’t have to live in Belmar to comment on the blog. Or even run it.

    Monday, November 11, 2019 at 8:19 am | Permalink
  43. Anonymous wrote:

    High Steel – YouTube › watch

    #40 – If you like that, here’s one of a friend of mine ((passed away now). Good video, but the music isn’t good I think.

    Video for High Steel 13:47

    Jun 18, 2014 – Uploaded by NFB
    This short film is a fascinating portrait of artisanal skill, marginalized labour, and the growth of an iconic city

    Monday, November 11, 2019 at 4:55 am | Permalink
  44. Aileen wrote:

    Ditto #40
    I’m sure Tom loved the quip about the press not being able to get umbrellas. haha;)

    Monday, November 11, 2019 at 7:11 am | Permalink
  45. eugene creamer wrote:

    the Main Street lighting looks nice and the former Busy Bee laundry went ADA access compliant with their parking lot … all the improvements will increase customer base.

    Monday, November 11, 2019 at 7:25 am | Permalink
  46. Another Highrise wrote:

    Ordinance 2019-35 does not simply add the two properties in question to the redevelopment zone. They were already in it. Instead, it changes the requirements governing them. It allows for less parking than would normally be required. It also allows for a much taller building than would normally be allowed.

    The DePepe building on 10th is next to the railroad and the other large apartment building. This proposed one on 9th is east of Main and basically on a residential street considering the bulk of the frontage is on 9th, not Main.

    Monday, November 11, 2019 at 9:09 am | Permalink
  47. yes wrote:

    Thank you #46. These are the situations that need to be addressed during council meetings.

    Monday, November 11, 2019 at 10:42 am | Permalink

    #47 I mean the lights are great and all, but they are temporary. A building of this scale would change downtown and the plaza forever and open the floodgates for Belmar to become a city, I’m surprised more people aren’t talking about it.

    All the other new buildings on Main are 3 stories. As soon as a 4 story building goes in, that will be the new norm. For 12th, for the rec center/borough hall, and everywhere else. In fact I wouldn’t be surprised if as soon as a 4 story gets built, they start proposing 5 to see if they can slip one by. All it takes is one.

    Monday, November 11, 2019 at 12:14 pm | Permalink
  49. #47 please attend council and zoning meetings and express your concerns. Residents attendance makes a difference. This blog does not affect change.

    Monday, November 11, 2019 at 9:45 pm | Permalink
  50. Tom Dilberger wrote:

    #49 – Agreed that people should go to the meetings and express their views. But I disagree as to whether or not this blog changes things. This is an effective agent for change in the town. Obviously, the change doesn’t take place overnight, but it does effect change. For example, we got rid of Matt & Co., largely I think through the agitation on this blog and now we must get rid of this group we put in there in their place, largely for the same reason. They’re inexperienced people not prone to making logical decisions.

    Tuesday, November 12, 2019 at 7:46 am | Permalink
  51. eugene creamer wrote:

    the Redevelopment Plan for Block 95, Lots 5&7 (bank property) is on the Nov 18th Planning Board agenda

    Tuesday, November 12, 2019 at 7:46 am | Permalink
  52. Ha! wrote:

    #50 Your guy didn’t get in so the bashing of the current administration continues. Stop being a sore loser and so negative. The Reps won in a landslide again. Why don’t you run if you are so logical?

    Tuesday, November 12, 2019 at 8:53 am | Permalink
  53. WHAT! wrote:

    I heard phony chief Housman failed the chiefs test and the mayor and BA are allowing a do over test in December. Are you kidding me? This was your golden opportunity to get rid of that unqualified, thieving civil servant. Is this rumor true?

    Tuesday, November 12, 2019 at 11:08 am | Permalink
  54. Guest wrote:

    Walsifer is as phony as Doherty, just with a red tie.

    Tuesday, November 12, 2019 at 11:38 am | Permalink
  55. 10th Ave wrote:

    The new apt building on 10th and Railroad is 4 stories, they had to abandon their plan for retail space on the lower level due to the parking issue ( they bricked up the retail windows).
    The new structure at Jaeger Lumber is huge but I believe it will remain as open shelving for lumber ? They are one of our oldest and biggest tax payers, happy for them.

    Tuesday, November 12, 2019 at 12:06 pm | Permalink
  56. Not Again wrote:

    #54 – Has he also engaged in alleged criminal activity?

    Tuesday, November 12, 2019 at 12:14 pm | Permalink
  57. Another Highrise wrote:

    #55 Yes, 4 stories there makes some kind of sense as it’s next to the railroad and basically adjacent to the large apartment building that is 9(?) stories. But I think having that 4 story building helps future developers make their case. If a 4 story building is allowed to be built east of main, look out Belmar Inn and all those other properties.

    The proposed bank site is a different story. It’s next to houses rather than a 9 story apartment building, and on a residential street, not railroad ave.

    It seems like an interesting strategy…Instead of proposing a plan and asking for a variance, just change the redevelopment rules for your lot! That way no variances needed!

    Tuesday, November 12, 2019 at 12:39 pm | Permalink
  58. I Agree #57 wrote:

    Which proposed bank site ? The old BOA on 9th ?
    I was told they were going to make the main building on Main street and 9th into offices but convert the ATM property into some sort of high rise. Horrible idea.

    Tuesday, November 12, 2019 at 12:54 pm | Permalink
  59. Guest wrote:

    57 – This is the trick of re-development zones. Another “in the bag” deal that we will all just have to live with. 54, you are pretty spot on.

    Tuesday, November 12, 2019 at 12:55 pm | Permalink
  60. Another Highrise wrote:

    #58 Yes, the old BofA building and the lot behind it containing the drive up teller. The plan is not public, they are currently in the process of re-writing the redevelopment zone rules to suite what they want to build. Making up their own rules allows them to bypass zoning as I said above.

    The proposed changes to the rules include lowering the number of parking spaces needed and increasing the height allowed. It allows for a 46,000sqft building with 30 apartments, four stories. It would be the tallest on Main Street (every other building is only 3 stories). The plan also states that tax breaks and incentives will be given to the developer (but we get hit with +21%).

    The planning board meeting where this will be discussed is on Monday Nov 18. I encourage everyone that is concerned about these issues to attend and be heard. If this is allowed to go through look for other developers to use the same tactics.

    Tuesday, November 12, 2019 at 1:42 pm | Permalink
  61. Katrina wrote:

    If any one really wants to voice opinion, do as Linda Sharks suggests. It is the Planning Board who will make the decisions about that project. Go there on Monday the 18th with questions and concerns.

    Tuesday, November 12, 2019 at 3:31 pm | Permalink
  62. Parking wrote:

    I didn’t realize all those spots should be in new building on 10th. Walked through and saw all are numbered so maybe a scam to get initial approval?

    Tuesday, November 12, 2019 at 9:29 pm | Permalink
  63. Pay to play wrote:

    Admin. I remember you posted something about the agreement that Dpeepee provide 23 parking spots in his building at 10th and RR for the public. Is there any way you can re post that for our new mayor,council and BA can see. Thank you

    Wednesday, November 13, 2019 at 2:01 am | Permalink
  64. admin wrote:

    Page 10

    Wednesday, November 13, 2019 at 6:39 am | Permalink
  65. Extra Lot wrote:

    I am betting that the 10th Ave Apt Building owner is hoping everyone forgot about the public parking spaces and directs them to the new “lot” that he built several blocks away on Railroad Avenue.

    Wednesday, November 13, 2019 at 7:04 am | Permalink
  66. Pay to play wrote:

    Thanks admin. I stand corrected. 22 spots not 23 for downtown retailers. Let’s get a sign put up notifying the shoppers they can park in there.

    Wednesday, November 13, 2019 at 8:08 am | Permalink
  67. eugene creamer wrote:

    the 22 ‘public parking spaces’ will be taken by the building tenants … the only sign that would make sense is ‘Garage Full’

    Wednesday, November 13, 2019 at 11:57 am | Permalink
  68. shaking my head wrote:

    What about making the 22 public parking spaces 2 hour parking with no overnight parking allowed? That area will also be more congested once the physical therapy place opens in the former Santander building.

    Thursday, November 14, 2019 at 8:26 am | Permalink
  69. admin wrote:

    The “public” parking spaces are numbered?

    Thursday, November 14, 2019 at 8:35 am | Permalink
  70. #66 wrote:

    The physical therapy business has their own reserved parking spots that they inherited from Santander Bank. parking shouldn’t be a problem for them.

    Thursday, November 14, 2019 at 8:44 am | Permalink
  71. Parking wrote:

    Yes. All spots were numbered when I walked through which was only a week or so after the first tenants started to move in. We couldn’t find parking so parked on the other side of the railroad and their spots were basically empty. Empty, but numbered.

    Thursday, November 14, 2019 at 10:50 am | Permalink
  72. admin wrote:

    Is the “public” parking being metered? Why would those spots be numbered?

    Thursday, November 14, 2019 at 11:29 am | Permalink
  73. Anonymous wrote:

    Apparently they are numbered for the tenants in violation of the agreement. Take back those spots and meter them. This will prevent the tenants from long term parking their junkers there. The money brought in can go towards re-cooping the true value of the property to the taxpayers that gave this property away at a bargain rate political price.

    Thursday, November 14, 2019 at 1:54 pm | Permalink
  74. Aileen wrote:

    Why would they even be metered? The original lot was free, so the new spots should be too.

    Thursday, November 14, 2019 at 7:02 pm | Permalink
  75. Aileen wrote:

    Landlords of houses in Belmar must obtain certificates of occupancy, with a number of occupants listed on the document. The number is based on number of bedrooms and square footage of bedrooms. Typically each BR gets 2 people. If a BR doesn’t have windows (egress for fire safety) they won’t be counted as bedrooms. I wonder if there are fire safety precautions in new buildings, or do the 2 BR units here only get certs. of occupancy for 2 people.

    Thursday, November 14, 2019 at 7:22 pm | Permalink
  76. NYC must windows wrote:

    #75. Finding ways to bring natural light into interior spaces has long been a crucial consideration for architects, but regulating sunlight wasn’t such a pressing question until the middle of the 19th century, when urban populations spiked. Low-wage industrial workers were often packed into damp, crowded, often windowless tenements, usually located near factories. Progressive reformers pressed city and state lawmakers to crack down on such dwellings, and in 1867, New York State passed its first Tenement House Act, requiring (among other things) that every habitable room needed a window—a law that still exists in the city’s building codes today. Subsequent laws specified what types of spaces windows had to open towards (first, dim shafts; later, brighter courtyards). Soon, other cities followed.

    Friday, November 15, 2019 at 4:30 am | Permalink
  77. Tom Dilberger wrote:

    Rule of thumb is whatever hurts the citizens most in our town is what will be done.

    Friday, November 15, 2019 at 6:18 am | Permalink
  78. Anonymous wrote:

    #74- Maam. Metering the public spots would prevent the building residents from taking up those public spots with third, and fourth and fifth cars on long terms. How would YOU propose to enforce it??????????????????????

    Friday, November 15, 2019 at 4:43 pm | Permalink
  79. the whole lot wrote:

    Wow 78, that’s a lot of question marks. Does each one represent the seriousness of the question? Or do they represent frustration over the matter? I think it would be unfortunate if the rest of us had to be penalized with paying for parking just to keep the tenants of this monstrosity from parking where they shouldn’t. Perhaps an enforceable time limit on the spots would stop them from parking their extra cars for long periods. If a car is there for more than, say, two hours- it gets a ticket. At least from 7am til 8pm. That might discourage the new tenants from taking over the spots. As long as it’s enforced. They may start keeping their cars in the train station lot which of course would hurt the many businesses in the plaza. But, hey, at lease the developer who got the old lot for a song won’t have to be burdened with paying taxes for a few decades. So the 21% municipal increase we all have to endure wont bother the owners of the shiny new building. Thank you Mr Doherty- your greed and lack of morals shall be enjoyed for generations. We would all like to return the favor by helping you move out of town. Say the word and you’ll have thousands of able bodies lending a hand.

    Saturday, November 16, 2019 at 8:51 am | Permalink
  80. anon wrote:

    Admin or one of those on this blog who are adept at OPRA,are the payment in lieu numbers for each deal available to the public ,would love to know how good a deal our elected officials are cutting the developers vs what the assessor would do to them if they were just like the rest of us lucky taxpayers.

    Saturday, November 16, 2019 at 2:05 pm | Permalink
  81. admin wrote:

    Saturday, November 16, 2019 at 2:53 pm | Permalink
  82. Aileen wrote:

    #78- I guess it would prevent the tenants from taking them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! hehe

    Saturday, November 16, 2019 at 2:29 pm | Permalink

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.