Advertisement

Archive for Friday, September 28, 2012

Letter to the Editor: Parking costs

September 28, 2012

Advertisement

To the editor:

I’m trying to figure out why Lawrence needs to add another level to the parking garage for the library, the funds for which have already been approved by Lawrence voters. Presently, there are 126 spaces, which is more than adequate, even in the summer when the pool is open. The new garage will double that number to 250. The extra spaces will benefit our thriving downtown. But the commission wants to spend an additional $1.2 million to add another 74 spaces and have the businesses of downtown pay for it. Not just the business, but the churches, too. Trinity Episcopal, for example, will pay a $12,000 assessment over the 10-year benefit district, Plymouth about $10,000.

Why the extra expense when the 250 seems more than adequate? Could it be for the talked-about future development on the west side of the 600 block of Vermont (the post office) or the possible building on the east side of the 800 block where there is an existing parking lot? If this is the plan there should be a mechanism for the developers to either provide their own parking or pay for the additional level at the library. The downtown property owners already paid for the Ninth and New Hampshire garage, as did all Lawrence taxpayers, when the proposed development in that area failed to materialize about 10 years ago thereby nullifying the additional tax revenue it would have generated.

The “if we build it, they will come”  doesn’t always work out and costs all money.

Comments

Steven Gaudreau 1 year, 6 months ago

Wilbur, Fritzel owns old Local Burger building.

1

Phil Minkin 1 year, 6 months ago

The added level could have easily been on the original bond issue, but the commissioners knew it was dubious. They wouldn't dare put it on as a separate issue because voters know it is a sop to developers.

1

Richard Heckler 1 year, 6 months ago

Put these questions on the November Ballot.

Do taxpayers want a 40 million $$$$$ field house?

Do taxpayers want further spending on PLAY over and above the USD497 expenditure of $20 million $$$$?

Do taxpayers want to spend 2 million $$$$ on additional parking at the library

Do taxpayers want to continue paying the Chamber of Commerce as the community's economic growth advisor considering past performance at a cost of $400,000 a year?

Do taxpayers want to continue with City Commission approval of multi-million $$$$$ subsidies to local developers?

Let the taxpayers decide!

1

Richard Heckler 1 year, 6 months ago

Do local politicians ever asked themselves why taxpayers do not trust them with OUR tax dollars?

--- This parking lot

--- the field house

--- Riverfront Plaza

--- Tanger Mall

--- Baur Farms

--- the parking garage

--- $12 million subsidies to hotel developers

--- the quite unusual 31st street design plan

--- the 100 million $$$$ sewage treatment plant

--- the over saturated retail market

--- the reckless spending by the former USD 497 school board such as 20 million $$$$$ spent on PLAY projects and Paying 23,000 $$$$$ an acre for 75 acres of undeveloped land to a local developer

Fritzel people own the Local Burger building.

People say it is cheaper to build now than later. Does that mean taxpayers should get strong armed into building something we taxpayers do not need? The answer is NO.

Coming up with this parking lot scheme after the fact really demands tons of justification which is not readily available. Now we have reckless planning supported with reckless spending.

1

oneeye_wilbur 1 year, 6 months ago

Maybe the Eldridge is working a plan to get the lot behind it? Who currently owns the building where local burger was. ? 72 spaces is not very many. Something is being worked in the backdoor political shed.

6

Commenting has been disabled for this item.