Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Landlord and residents press Greenburgh board for parking plan to land grocery on East Hartsdale Avenue
Summary
A landlord and a resident retail consultant told the Greenburgh Town Board a prospective full‑service grocer is interested in a Hartsdale storefront but will not proceed without 40–60 convenient parking spaces; the board asked for occupancy data, invited the parking authority and set a May 13 follow‑up.
Louis Weisman, a representative of 4830 Building Court and a property owner in Hartsdale for decades, told the Greenburgh Town Board on April 22 that he has marketed a vacant storefront at 196 East Hartsdale Avenue for more than a year and has been approached by a prospective full‑service grocer who would serve as an anchor tenant. Weisman said the prospect’s principal concern is parking and urged the board to help secure 40–60 nearby spaces so the tenant will sign on.
"Parking, parking, parking," Weisman said, naming convenience, affordability and visibility as the first rule of retail. He said his group has “invested well over $50,000” preparing the space and that he does not yet have a letter of intent or lease he can disclose publicly.
Steven Goldberg, a resident and retail consultant who said he has worked with merchants in neighboring downtowns, told the board merchants consistently report poor parking visibility and weak marketing. "Our parking garages ... they're not filled," Goldberg said, and he estimated utilization of the Site A garage at about 20 percent. He called the vacancy pattern a "self‑fulfilling prophecy" that depresses meter income and discourages quality tenants.
Board members welcomed the presentation but repeatedly asked for systematic data before committing town funds. One member noted the Hartsdale Parking District received a recent town allocation for enforcement and asked whether isolating spaces or subsidizing parking for one tenant would be fair to taxpayers. A board member said the town had approved $114,000 to the parking district last month for enforcement staff, a fact the board said needs to be weighed against any new spending.
Proposed near‑term steps included: inviting the Hartsdale Parking District to the next meeting, commissioning an independent audit or occupancy study of the parking facilities, and creating a small task force of landlords, town liaisons and marketing leads to assemble a plan. The board set a target to reconvene on or around May 13 to review the audit results and a marketing proposal.
Weisman and Goldberg suggested non‑costly marketing actions (better signage, clearer communication that some parking is free after certain hours, and a downtown advocate role similar to other towns) and recommended testing a ParkMobile‑type one‑hour free parking system to improve turnover. The board agreed to pursue data, meet with the parking authority and return with recommendations.
The board did not make any formal spending commitments at the meeting; members said they would seek occupancy figures and legal/financial analysis before approving subsidies or reassigning spaces.
