| Author | Message | ||
     jayjay Citizen Username: Jayjayp Post Number: 362 Registered: 6-2005 |
Given the full page ad in today's News Wretched, it seemed like the Millenium project deserves its own thread. Can someone explain to me how this got this far? What do they mean that all that is left is BOT approval? And how does this project mesh with the recent survey we were advised about in the Gaslight? You do a project and THEN ask for citizen input? Is this any way to run a town? Besides, what area is this supposed to encompass? They said South Orange Ave forms one of the borders. DOes that include everything from Dunkin Donuts south? Who has Millenium been dealing with? This deal would require taking over the Sloan Street PArking lot and the lot by the rescue squad too. wouldn't it? Let's see...Calabrese, Gross and the Parking Authority. So that's why they want Theroux on the Authority. Now I get it. | ||
| Matt Foley Citizen Username: Mattfoley Post Number: 529 Registered: 6-2004  |
This is a job for George Bailey. Keep that evil Mr. Potter from ruining our little town. | ||
| Josh Holtz Citizen Username: Jholtz Post Number: 234 Registered: 4-2004 |
Conflict of interest - what conflict of interest? The way I see it if there was anyone else chosen as the PA Commish then there would be a conflict -a real conflict with the VP's and VA's downtown vision - whatever that may be. | ||
| Spitz Supporter Username: Doublea Post Number: 1365 Registered: 3-2003 |
The Millennium ad says there will be an "informational meeting" hosted by the Chamber of Commerce Feb. 7 at Valley National Bank. Does this mean that the Chamber is endorsing the proposal? Maybe Elaine or Pizzaz can answer. (They're the only MOLers that I know are members of the Chamber). Just curious. | ||
| John Glick Citizen Username: Jgg Post Number: 3 Registered: 12-2005 |
Since the proposed project has both a residential and business component, I would think that the Chamber of Commerce would want to learn what type of business impact there will be on the Village. | ||
| Spitz Supporter Username: Doublea Post Number: 1366 Registered: 3-2003 |
Good answer ____. | ||
| Pizzaz Supporter Username: Pizzaz Post Number: 3088 Registered: 11-2001  |
Spitz: I'm sure Elaine will post an answer to your question. As I know, Elaine, as chamber president, had a conversation with the resident developer and he agreed to hold a gathering to review the proposal. You don't need to be a member to attend this presentation. It's a chamber event open to the public. I suggest you come if time permits. Personally, I think pilots are not needed for residential development, and secondly, I think there is an over saturation of housing in this plan. In reading the News Record this week, we learn that the school budget is spinning out of control, and, IMHO, this proposed development, which the developer has demanded a pilot, would cause significant added burdens to a financially stressed public school system. The end result would be a decrease in the quality of life for all residents, and unknown costs to support an increase in school funding. I like and support the idea spoken about with respect to a community developed master plan (through a DRMC) supported by the residents. I quiver to think that this over-development may be hijacked by a majority of the trustees in the name of progress.... | ||
| vermontgolfer Supporter Username: Vermontgolfer Post Number: 344 Registered: 12-2002 |
Pizzaz, I'm not disagreeing with your position, however, I think it's high time that the BOE take a real hard look at their top heavy admin as a jumping off point to reduce expenses. We cannot afford to jeopordize our kids education, but this admin is to quick to add supervisory staff at the expense of programs and education, IMHO. | ||
| Spitz Supporter Username: Doublea Post Number: 1367 Registered: 3-2003 |
Pizzaz - Thank you very much for your response. I certainly agree with you, particularly with your position on pilots not being needed for residential development (and more so for ownership units). I know that this was part of your platform when running for BOT, and I respect you for reinforcing that position. Thank you. | ||
| Spitz Supporter Username: Doublea Post Number: 1368 Registered: 3-2003 |
For the record, people on this board had been saying before the New Market and Beifus pilot agreements had been signed, that one of the problems with granting a pilot to one developer was that every developer after that would be asking for one. Beifus was quoted in the News-Record as answering why he needed a pilot, something like " I guess I need one because New Market got one, so my units would be competive." | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 3287 Registered: 5-2001  |
While the Redevelopment of Valley Street has potential, I had to play a game I like to play whenever I hear anything from a Salesperson, Realtor or Developer called - "I smell Bull sh*t "" aa The ad says: "Proposed Valley Street redevelopment to bring more than $3 million annually to South Orange" I smell Bull sh*t Even if this project were approved tomorrow, it wouldn't be completed for 5-10 years. At the current rate of our tax increases, $3 million won't mean much by then. Also, Later in the ad it says "currently the land generates $561,602 in property taxes with only $154,440 going directly to the village". This means almost $300,000 that currently goes to the SCHOOLS today will disappear...plus countless additional school children will appear. The ad says: "For anyone who thought the redevelopment of downtown would consist of more than dusty 'coming soon' signs and vacant lots, community support may finally get the job done" I smell Bull sh*t In the ad and during the BOT presentation Millenium said NOTHING about getting Beifus, ShopRite or Sayid done. Those 'coming soon' signs and vacant lots will remain. The ad says: "open surface parking lots will be replaces by secure parking decks that will add a net gain of 1,504 parking spaces in South Orange. This will include a new train station parking deck..." I smell Bull sh*t At the BOT presentation, I don't recall a number as high as 1504 ADDITIIONAL spots. In addition, WHERE would those spots go, who would manage all these decks & who will convince NJ Transit to give up "air rights" of their lot. Obviously, parking will be one of the biggest battles, which has made it apparent why John Gross wants his wife to control parking. Conflict? What conflict? The ad says: "There will be no rentals as part of this plan" I smell Bullsh*t There will be PLENTY of rentals once speculators buy the condos and rent them. The ad says: "All that remains is the approval of the Board of Trustees." I smell Bull sh*t For the Quarry development of 62 townhouses on 20 acres, the Planning Board hearings alone took 2 years. This plan is for over 500 condos on 15 acres in the heart of the business district which will obviously require massive impacts on water, traffic, schools, environment etc, etc. This is obviously being put on the fast track, but it sounds like as much due diligence has been done on this one, as was done on the little Shop Rite site that has been dormant for almost 5 years. | ||
| Elaine Harris Citizen Username: Elaineharris Post Number: 70 Registered: 12-2004 |
At the last Chamber board meeting which was very well attended, the developer's request to make a public presentation was discussed and unanimously approved by the board. The Chamber of Commerce has not taken a position on the subject, one way or the other. Since this proposal could result in a major impact on the community, it is imperative that we have an open public forum to hear and to see what this is all about, and to be able to ask questions in a neutral and welcoming environment. I hope you will all attend and I look forward to the challenging questions that I know you will ask. The attorney for Millennium is Leonard Berkeley who lives on N. Wyoming Avenue and is a lifelong South Orange resident. Some or all of the members of Millennium will also attend. | ||
| CageyD Citizen Username: Cageyd Post Number: 570 Registered: 6-2003 |
I have to ask, have all the existing "new" condos and rentals been purchased/rented? I still see ads for Gaslight Commons, and the Church St. properties. Flooding the town with more units will drive down the value of all the units - which is not a desirable situation to be in. Boot Bill!!! | ||
| JoRo Citizen Username: Autojoe51 Post Number: 50 Registered: 10-2005 |
In principle it's good that we are sponsoring an open dialogue between town and would-be developers, but this kick-off discussion should be between the town and its residents and MULTIPLE developers offering different visions for South Orange. These MANY developers should have to make their cases publicly, in front of an audience. There should be numerous meetings like this, elucidating all the fine points in the developers' arguments, and then, only then, can an informed decision be made -- by the public or the board. Despite a lack of progress in S.O., the last thing we need is a rush to development. | ||
| Dave Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 8488 Registered: 4-1997  |
Still waiting for: a) a master plan b) public input c) open and competitive bidding process (in that order) | ||
| Elaine Harris Citizen Username: Elaineharris Post Number: 71 Registered: 12-2004 |
JoRo: Our point exactly. We all know what should have been, but don't blame the messenger. As the saying goes, "It beats a blank." To my knowledge, there are no other developers interested in the "Valley Street Corridor" (a term used by our BoT regarding its vision for redevelopment.) If there are other developers, now is the time for the BoT to identify them. | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2517 Registered: 4-2002 |
MHD: good post. EH: Actually, first the planner and the planning board are supposed to have public hearings on whether Valley is an area in need of redevelopment and then it will go to the BOT. If there is an approval, then we should invite other developers to the table. One thing the ad shows, is that Millenium has plenty of money to try to blitz the town with advertising while trying to force the BOT to take action. I don't plan on backing down to their pressure. This ad did nothing but to make me think it will be a mistake to do business with them. If Millenium had wanted to move forward, they could have acquired the property and submitted an application to the planning board. They could conceivably do the project without the BOT's approval (of course no PILOT). | ||
| JoRo Citizen Username: Autojoe51 Post Number: 51 Registered: 10-2005 |
I'm not blaming the messenger. But the VP and/or BOT, for example, could have put the brakes on a meeting until more developers had thrown their hats in the ring. In terms of no others being interested: How many even know of the opportunity? It's possible that there's no other interest, but seems unlikely. | ||
| peteglider Citizen Username: Peteglider Post Number: 1744 Registered: 8-2002 |
Mark -- All I know about Millenium is what I've seen at the BOT meetings and from web searches. They seem to have completed and are in the process of completing quite a number of similar projects. Whether they are the "best" -- I dont' know. And yes, the plan seems a bit grand. But the pictures sure are pretty ;-) . Having a savvy, experienced, well-heeled, aggressive developer IS in our best interest -- rather than the home grown "amateurs" who muddle along year after year on our other projects. Something tells me that 1) Milennium wouldn't be broadsided by "water" issues like Beifus, and 2) they wouldn't have their $$ tied up for years like Beifus, Shoprite, etc. with projects that crawl along. Personally, I hope the village can attract a few other developers, who will do at least as much homework and as much communication to inform the public as Milennium has. Pete | ||
| John Glick Citizen Username: Jgg Post Number: 4 Registered: 12-2005 |
I agree with peteglider that it is quite evident based upon Millennium's track record of projects completed that they can't be cast in the same light as the other projects that are crawling along. I look forward to hearing more about this project on February 7. | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2518 Registered: 4-2002 |
Joro: The VP invited Millenium to speak to the public. The BOT was not aware until that night although we had seen the presentation previously. I though the timing and the forum was inappropiate. Pete: I don't disagree that Millenium might be a great developer but they are definitely not the only one in NJ. I also think we should hear presentations from other developers but Millenium would obviously prefer we do not. Nothing is stopping them from acquiring property and then submitting a plan (to the planning board). They want the BOT to skip the process, declare Valley street in need of redevelopment (no planning board hearings), use the threat of condemnation to make it easier to purchase property, and then give them a PILOT. The larger the project potentially is, the more like it is to attract quality developers. Beifus is not a developer (by any stretch of the imagination). He is a propertyowner who has been given approval by some to build. You are right that a major developer would never have been blindsided by the "water issue" and in fact, when a major developer looked at the property years ago they had concerns about the water. And Beifus knew about that too. | ||
| Elaine Harris Citizen Username: Elaineharris Post Number: 72 Registered: 12-2004 |
To M.Rosner and all: The Planning Board DID HAVE a "public" meeting on September 29, at 7:00 pm at Village Hall. The only notice that went out was a flyer that was hand delivered randomly to some persons in the area. I have a copy in front of me, but I don't have a scanner. Is there anyone out there who has a fax that I can send it to, then you can scan it and print it here? The subject of the meeting was: "Whether the Valley Street corridor qualifies as an area in need of redevelopment and/or revitalization." At that meeting, Millennium was mentioned as the developer. I am pretty sure that that meeting preceded the night when Millennium appeared before the BoT, so one would assume that the trustees were aware of them. Apparently there is a major communication gap. Furthermore, I disagree with M.Rosner's suggestion that "nothing" stops developers from acquiring property and developing it privately. There is something VERY BIG that stops them dead in their tracks, namely REDEVELOPMENT. Would you spend the money to acquire property so that someone could take it away from you? I wouldn't. Any decent developer has to have the blessing of the government if for no other reason than to insure that redevelopment won't blindside them. | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2519 Registered: 4-2002 |
EH: That meeting was not a hearing to discuss redevelopment nor was it properly advertised. Any decent developer would try to work with government rather than run a full page ad that misrepresents what still needs to happen. | ||
| Pay to Play Citizen Username: Parkingsux Post Number: 282 Registered: 6-2005  |
Do we know whether Susan Gruel's firm, Millenium or any other interested participant has contibuted to the election efforts over the past 8 years? Why would Susan hold such a secretive and unpublized meeting other than to go through the motions to enact a redevelopment zone. A meeting for which a record of attendance was taken. Why would the BoT not inform the public that it had been approached by a major developer almost a year ago? The credibility of the BoT is non existent from a public communications and planning viewpoint. How could Millenium already be selected the developer of the Third Street lot without a publicly vetted proposal of what is envisioned? | ||
| Two Senses Citizen Username: Twosense Post Number: 407 Registered: 7-2004 |
A project of this scale and market value would attract quality developers from across the region and most likely the country, if our Village wanted to consider bona fide alternatives in its quest to redevelop Valley Street. To simply compare Millenium to our local crop of amateur, wannabe developers is ludicrous. Millenium's desperate, full-page ad speaks volumes about the integrity of its pitch. First the headline trumpets "Proposed Valley Street redevelopment to bring more than $3 million annually to South Orange". Millenium obviously believes that residents will embrace its grand plan to save a few hundred dollars on their tax bill, and remain convinced that a project of this scale would generate no incremental expense for our government or school district. Second, Millenium asserts that "While the plan for Village Station has been in the works for more than a year, Millenium Homes first presented it to the Board of Trustees in December." Others have confirmed that the VP, VA, and VC have been in discussions with Millenium for at least a YEAR, and probably dating back to when they bestowed “designated developer” status to Millenium for Third and Valley Streets. And, if none of them shared any aspect of these discussions with our other TRUSTEES, we’re being governed by a runaway train. Third, Millenium closes its aggressive ad with "All that remains is the approval of the Board of Trustees." Is this supposed to bully our TRUSTEES into approving this plan, and rallying our community behind Millenium? Do we really want to turn over a quarter of our downtown to a bully developer -- not the best start for building public support and positive community relations. No wonder it's insisted on the Village establishing eminent domain powers to assemble this massive parcel. And, fourth, Millenium appears to have co-opted our Chamber of Commerce into hosting a meeting to share its plan with residents. Why isn’t Millenium seeking and promoting an open, public forum through the Village – especially since the meeting has been organized and will be hosted by two property owners on Valley Street, both of which may benefit from the purchase of their properties, if Millenium proceeds as planned? Millenium last attempt to share its plans with the "public" was at a recent BoT meeting, for which it wasn't on the agenda, for which our TRUSTEES claimed they were neither asked nor told in advance, and for which the public wasn't notified. And, none of its listed partners appeared -- only its politically connected attorney and architects. Surely there must be more than one TRUSTEE (noun, 1 a : one to whom something is entrusted 2 b : one occupying a position of trust and performing functions comparable to those of a trustee), who can step up to the plate and stop this runaway train. Posted on Thursday, December 15, 2005 - 6:35 pm: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No vision, no strategy. No updated master plan. No downtown plan. No Village-generated requirements/specifications. No Request for Information (RFI) from potential developers. No Request for Proposals (RFP) from vetted developers. No competing developer submissions. No environmental, traffic, school district, public safety, or economic assessments. No progress on the Beifus, New Market, Sayid Plaza, or Town Hall Deli sites. No bona fide community input. No evidence of sensitivity to the scale of the downtown development (5-story New Market, 4-story Millenium proposal). No evidence of management depth in Village government to handle current redevelopment plans. No confidence in current administration. No due diligence of Millenium's track record, financial resources, management, or affiliates. Yes, there can be no disagreement that South Orange is ready to move this project along in an expeditious manner, and designate the first developer to submit costly architectural renderings as the sole developer of a $200 million development covering 25% of our downtown and promising to supplement property taxes by 20%. Full speed ahead! | ||
| Elaine Harris Citizen Username: Elaineharris Post Number: 73 Registered: 12-2004 |
M.Rosner: I respectfully disagree with you. That meeting was specifically held for redevelopment. The fact that it was not well advertised is the fault of the governing body, not the public nor the developer. The full page ad was privately paid for by the developer and let's face it, they are in business and this is their advertising. That is how our economy works. How you respond to this ad is purely subjective. Can we expect to see you at this meeting, Mr. Rosner? I hope so. | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 3289 Registered: 5-2001 |
Elaine, In fairness, I don't think Mark is the "enemy" here. Mark did speak out about the traffic when Millenium presented before the BOT and he did support many of our posts above questioning the tactics of Millenium with the ad they placed. If only he were as outspoken when Pulte/Trammell Crow were presenting....  | ||
| Elaine Harris Citizen Username: Elaineharris Post Number: 74 Registered: 12-2004 |
In all fairness to me, nothing I said could reasonably be construed as stating that Mark is an enemy. However, he did post certain information above and I respectfully disagreed with it and gave my reasons. If I attributed fault to a governing body as an entity, then to the extent that he is a part of it, he is as much "at fault" as the others. The buck stops there even if he has a minority opinion. The concept of calling each other "enemies" is childish and must stop. This is business and politics and it is serious. | ||
| susan1014 Supporter Username: Susan1014 Post Number: 1314 Registered: 3-2002 |
I don't care if Millenium is the best developer out there -- their actions to date make me distrustful of them. This process has been deeply flawed, and seems to be designed to give favorable terms to a favored developer with the minimum of debate, evaluation or public input. What we've seen so far is shameful. It smacks of weak governing skills at best, and backroom deals (corruption?) at worst. If this is not the case, Bill C. and others need to make this clear as soon as possible. Is Bill ready to go on the record and say that Millenium is being premature? | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2520 Registered: 4-2002 |
Two senses: Good post EH: That meeting was NOT held by the governing body and that was made clear at a trustee meeting. The planner did it on her own in preparation for her presentation to the planning board. Susan: I will go on record as saying Millenium is being premature. I will further add that there has not been discussions by the BOT about the proposed project at any time other than whey the developer came to a meeting (and first time was in closed session). I know the developer has also showed the plans to some individuals in town trying to drum up support. If the ad in an indication of how they do business, I would rather find someone else. | ||
| Premature Citizen Username: Parkingsux Post Number: 283 Registered: 6-2005 |
Let's not shoot the load or rule anyone out, but let's rule the public in first on all major redevelopment efforts. The ballfield is ours, let's not toss the game for a lack of effort or foresight. | ||
| Elaine Harris Citizen Username: Elaineharris Post Number: 75 Registered: 12-2004 |
Mr. Rosner: I will accept your explanation that the meeting of September 29 was the plan of Susan Gruel. However, it was conducted in the Village Hall, hence it must have had the prior approval of the Village Administration. Since it was held in an official building, the public had every reason to believe that it was an official meeting. Only government sponsored entities are entitled to use the facility. For example, can the Chamber of Commerce host a meeting there? I don't think so, but if I am wrong, please correct me as I would like to have the use of the space. Secondly, Susan Gruel is an agent of the BoT by being its "planner." Again, the presumption is very strong that her meeting had the blessing of the powers that be. A subsequent disclaimer is not convincing. But I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps it was a mistake to have done it. Did she ever report back the results? | ||
| Elaine Harris Citizen Username: Elaineharris Post Number: 76 Registered: 12-2004 |
Sorry, one more thing to add: The invitation started out by saying: "The Village of South Orange invites you to a meeting..." If Susan Gruel wrote that, and if she did not have the authority to write that, were there any consequences? | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2521 Registered: 4-2002 |
To this date, I have not seen the invitation but was told it only went to property owners on or near valley street. From what I have been told, she was looking to get other views before she completed her study and report. It was not a general meeting wor was it a public hearing. We have not been given a report as of yet. I heard it might be ready in March. I know some people in village hall knew about the meeting and have to assume that they gave their ok. No reason was given as to why the BOT was not told other than it was a mistake (accidental). In any case, it could not qualify as an official hearing for considering the area to be in need of redevelopment. | ||
| Two Senses Citizen Username: Twosense Post Number: 408 Registered: 7-2004 |
This seems like a distracting digression. Susan Gruel is a principle of Hyer & Gruel, the firm that the Village hired to opine on whether Valley Street meets the NJ's statutory standards for being designated a blighted area in need of redevelopment, because Millenium has been pitching a massive development for some time. And, its modus operandi requires the power of eminent domain to force property owners to fold at near market rates, because its massive project cannot proceed with any hold-outs! The Village hired Gruel with the approval of the BoT, since the Village can't seem to hire a summer intern without BoT approval. Gruel called a September meeting IN Village Hall with the VA present, called at the last minute and poorly communicated only to businesses and residents of Valley Street. She curiously asked those present whether THEY were satisfied with the condition of Valley Street, which digressed into a discussion of brick pavers. So, this was a meeting held on behalf of the Village, paid for by the Village, on Village property, with Village senior management present. If the BoT was "out of the loop," add it the list of evidence of the runaway train governing our Village. Apparently, the meeting was held so that Gruel's firm could check off one of the deliverables from the scope of work it sold to the Village. Given the poor, last minute, limited communication about the meeting and haphazard, meandering interaction at the meeting, this couldn't possibly have been about gathering bona fide community feedback. P.S. Early in the meeting Gruel feigned ignorance about knowledge of specific developers with interest in Valley Street, but ultimately admitted to being aware that Millenium was involved. Who knows, maybe she simply was being clairvoyant, since this respectable developer just advertised, yesterday, "While the plan for Village Station has been in the works for more than a year, Millenium Homes first presented it to the Board of Trustees in December." | ||
| Spitz Supporter Username: Doublea Post Number: 1369 Registered: 3-2003 |
The meeting called by Susan Gruel was discussed on MOL in September 2005. All of you might be interested in the comments made at that time. /discus/messages/3133/90949.html | ||
| Premature Citizen Username: Parkingsux Post Number: 284 Registered: 6-2005 |
And I hold to those statements. The issue of safeguarding our community is still the issue at hand. Let's not sell it overseas. We MUST form a DRMC and vett a new master plan. This has to be taken out of the sole control of the administration and Ms. Gruel. | ||
| Josh Holtz Citizen Username: Jholtz Post Number: 239 Registered: 4-2004 |
What is the status of the DRMC? It's constantly mentioned but never formed. | ||
| John Glick Citizen Username: Jgg Post Number: 5 Registered: 12-2005 |
Although I have only been a resident of South Orange for a little less than a year, I am confused what the downside is related to the informational meeting on February 7th. In my limited time in the community, it is apparent that people are distressed and consistently complaining about being uninformed on issues such as development. While I'm sure that their will be issues related to whatever presentation Millennium makes, the fact of the matter is that the community at large should be happy that we will be informed and be able to debate the issues, which is ultimately what the public wants. Moreover, I don't see how the informational meeting will prohibit the process from taking place whereby the planner and the planning board have public hearings in order to determine if Valley Street is an area in need of redevelopment. Unless I'm missing something, I would think that after the February 7th meeting the community will be more informed when it comes time for the public hearings. | ||
| kenney Citizen Username: Kenney Post Number: 746 Registered: 11-2003 |
this just in from trustee jennings: the process needs to be looked at...it's the processing of the process. The only limit to our realization of tomorrow will be our doubts of today..FDR.. Liberty, when it begins to take root, is a plant of rapid growth...G.W. Everyone wants a voice in human freedom. There's a fire burning inside of all us...L.W. |
