Skip to content

Residents Demand To Pay For Parking!

Reprint courtesy of the Coast Star:Screen Shot 2016-03-24 at 7.47.50 AM

Interpretive statement:

Matt’s out of money and wants to charge for parking.


  1. Anonymous wrote:

    Check out lawsuits resulting from employers forcing staff to park away from their jobs to accommodate their patrons. Hint, Mall parking lots. Looks like zonin/planning board changes are around the corner. No sight line triangle consideration required in Belmar. Pedestrians beware.

    Thursday, March 24, 2016 at 8:25 am | Permalink
  2. joe goofinoff wrote:

    Connolly, Burke, Read, Volker – the usual suspects.

    Thursday, March 24, 2016 at 8:35 am | Permalink
  3. Belmar Independent wrote:

    Plans Made, plans Passed, Plans Ignored. Seaport Plaza Parking Deck
    The Seaport Parking Deck is proposed for construction over a portion of the Seaport Plaza parking lot as a later phase of redevelopment and only if the parking demand exceeds the capacity of the Plaza surface parking and other municipal lots in the redevelopment area. This facility is envisioned as four levels of parking (including the roof) on three and one-half stories, with the first parking level one-half story below grade. The deck would have a footprint of 115 feet by 180 feet, with two story street level retail fronting the Plaza, and a small amount of street level space (about 1,000 sq. ft.) for retail or an administrative office facing Seventh Avenue. The main level of retail space fronting on the Plaza would extend into the lower and ground levels of parking in order to allow a depth of 50 feet for the commercial uses (48 stalls per level). The upper two levels (3rd level and roof) of the parking deck
    would extend about 20 feet over the rear of the retail space to provide the full amount of parking (70 stalls per level) on those levels for a total of 236 parking spaces. However, the deck would be built on a portion of the Seaport Plaza currently planned for surface parking for about 50 parking spaces. Therefore the net gain would be 188 spaces. In addition, if it becomes necessary or desirable to recapture the space of the roof for outdoor recreational activities, such as miniature golf course, observation deck, amphitheater, or similar uses, the net increase in parking would be reduced to 118 spaces.

    Thursday, March 24, 2016 at 9:27 am | Permalink
  4. Anonymous wrote:

    The interpretive statement is spot on. How would any of this solve Belmar’s parking problems ??? Asbury and Red Bank have paid parking and still have serious parking issues.

    Thursday, March 24, 2016 at 9:48 am | Permalink
  5. Not a Burke fan wrote:

    They did not present a binding legal petition (therefore the council is under no obligation to respond in 20 days. It never does unless it’s a favorite group of Matt’s) although they could have if there was any real incentive to solve the problem. Yeah we got it, we need parking duh. Find a solutuion that works although at this point I’m not sure of any viable options. Obviously some type of tiered parking garage. We are too busy keeping up with repaying favors and making deals with outsiders to care if downtown is thriving or failing due to lack of parking. Here’s a thought Burke stop wondering, contemplating and considering dumb opinions maybe you should consider a second career as a philosopher. You are on the planning board but too weak to take a stand. Tomorrow, unless they cancel because the word it out Chef’s will be before the planning board looking for many variances at the old Connolly Stations. They want more outdoor dinning which I really have no problem with but occupancy is an important issue, ADA compliance AND PARKING. Chef’s is making enough money from Matt’s secret deals at the marina. Think about Belmar residents and local businesses first. Our downtown is becoming a jibby jabby mess of different businesses that fail within several years with no common clientele that it attracts. Unless you consider dumb young drunks as patrons. Take a ride through Pt. Pleasant they did it right, it’s lovely and busy all year. Belmar will crash and burn, and residents’ taxes are going to be out of control.

    Thursday, March 24, 2016 at 9:53 am | Permalink
  6. watchman wrote:

    Step 1: create a parking (or other) crisis
    Step 2: provide an expensive solution

    Sounds like a plan to me.

    Thursday, March 24, 2016 at 12:30 pm | Permalink
  7. Just Passing Through wrote:

    Just like the idea of adding meters to the other side of Ocean Ave. Parkers will move west in front of more homes. In this case they will move east again in front of homes. You will not have guests for the weekend or barbeque or birthday etc. no place to park on your own street.

    Thursday, March 24, 2016 at 12:59 pm | Permalink
  8. Vanilla wrote:

    #5. I have known Burke since 2012 or as I say, before he became a “public figure”. In all fairness he modestly championed parking downtown first when he joined to Belmar Chamber of Commerce ( in order to be active and get elected to council ) and again when he joined the Belmar Business Partnership ( in order to be active and again be elected to council). He must have had some effect. Doherty appointed him to the Planning Board. Nothing has been more successful in curbing his effectiveness. Sorry you missed the Planning Board meeting on Chef’s Anchor Tavern. You need to stop using Belmar Borough for accurate dates and times for board & meetings. All were changed in order to keep us from showing up.

    Thursday, March 24, 2016 at 1:36 pm | Permalink
  9. Not a Burke fan wrote:

    #8 My mistake it was the 21st. Sorry I missed it can only guess how screwed we are now. But if I had attended obviously nothing they wanted would have been denied.

    Thursday, March 24, 2016 at 2:37 pm | Permalink
  10. Vanilla wrote:

    #9. True. As long as we show up and speak out, they cannot support the myth that all is well. Though Burke will surely call you radical, unreasonable and actively trying to undermine a very friendly administration.

    Thursday, March 24, 2016 at 3:43 pm | Permalink
  11. 19 wrote:

    Tom Burke is &&&@@87). Just my view

    Thursday, March 24, 2016 at 9:08 pm | Permalink
  12. Joe Smolinski wrote:

    Here is what I don’t understand….

    Every year just before or after summer, i see the town whitening up the parking lines in the residential area, but at the same time, i seem them taking away several spots by painting over some white lines??


    If parking is such an issue in the town, why not just open up the parking in the spots as much as you can??

    Friday, March 25, 2016 at 8:18 am | Permalink
  13. Resident wrote:

    Cause the town is run by a bunch of dopes.

    Friday, March 25, 2016 at 11:21 am | Permalink
  14. Maria wrote:

    Why shop in belmar ever when there is free parking in many nearby towns and have all the services that belmar has?

    Friday, March 25, 2016 at 3:11 pm | Permalink
  15. A Voter 2 wrote:

    I will not pay to park for Rite Aid I can go to Shop Rite no fee for parking there!

    Friday, March 25, 2016 at 4:49 pm | Permalink
  16. Anonymous wrote:

    Or CVS, or Spring Lake, Msq, BB, no metered parking next water taxis. Hopefully they wont get grounded

    Friday, March 25, 2016 at 10:55 pm | Permalink
  17. Tom Burke wrote:

    There is some obvious confusion regarding the parking regulations contained in the petition sent to the Belmar Council on that subject. I was involved in the development of those recommendations. There is no recommendation for any paid parking other than for long or longer term parking spaces. The recommendations are made to help both residents and merchants, not hinder them. Perhaps the most controversial recommendation would be for metered parking similar to Ocean Avenue in the Plaza lot. That however has a recommendation of a 5 hour parking limit with the first 3 hours being free.

    Saturday, March 26, 2016 at 4:27 am | Permalink
  18. OLD MAN wrote:

    #17 Just another excuse.

    Saturday, March 26, 2016 at 8:08 am | Permalink
  19. Planet Belmar wrote:

    #17. You have to love Burke. He is free to respond, speak his mind on this blog. He is not restricted or censored. He just posted to his blog a nasty post about this post and this blog site. But he blocks folks from commenting. Hmm!

    Saturday, March 26, 2016 at 9:02 am | Permalink
  20. Anonymous wrote:

    Do as I say not as I do

    Saturday, March 26, 2016 at 10:29 am | Permalink
  21. ms.nobody wrote:

    I am thankful that the The Coast Star mentioned this website and referenced Dave in its March 24th article about the Lake Como Police matter. The hypocrisy and untruthfulness of some people can be exposed on this blog because the administrator does not suppress the voices of those who disagree with others in the comments and with the premises of the posts; nor does he twist the words of opponents and distort ideas for his own ends, but may use humor at times to make a point. He even lets people argue – up to a point. Unfortunately it is more difficult, perhaps impossible, to enlighten those who prefer and even enjoy keeping their heads buried in the sand and pledge allegiance to a leader whom they follow like sheep. Diversity is good, even jerks and dumbos have a voice.

    Saturday, March 26, 2016 at 11:01 am | Permalink

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.