| Author |
Message |
    
vermontgolfer
Supporter
Username: Vermontgolfer
Post Number: 408
Registered: 12-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 1:19 pm: | 
|
I'm for taking it and TAKING IT NOW! He is no more a developer than I'm a concert pianist. Please, Please get him out now and let's get something going.
Then we get focus on Mr. Sayid. |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 2865
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 1:25 pm: |
|
I am, frankly, surprised by the argument that Eric has put forth to not take the property. He wonders how long it will take if a new developer comes in. Well, Beifus is not doing anything at all. So a new developer would not be much further behind. Plus, I think it's is pretty self-evident that Beifus will not be in any kind of rush, and will likely not start any time soon. So what do we have to lose by bringing in an experienced developer? I don't mean Joe's Development Company. I mean a large developer who has done this kind of thing not once or twice, but dozens of times.
Does Eric (and the rest of the BOT), really think that a professional developer will take anywhere near the amount of time that Beifus will take to build out the space? |
Josh Holtz
Citizen
Username: Jholtz
Post Number: 409
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 1:37 pm: |
|
Rastro: And remember - even if Beifus would start tomorrow his project has morphed into something completely different than the original plans. Smaller building, basement removal, etc. I feel that his lack of knowledge has created a difficult lease to retailer and sale to potential condo owner.
If a new developer with any common sense and ability would have no problem creating a better space for the Village's downtown. |
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 3877
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 1:42 pm: |
|
Has anyone ever even looked at the architectural design for Beifus - it's a hideous box. It looks like something you would find in Queens.
http://www.southorange.org/development.asp?project=11
I again point to the Livingston Town Center project, that at least has some architectural style to it. |
Josh Holtz
Citizen
Username: Jholtz
Post Number: 410
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 2:30 pm: |
|
MHD: Is that what it is still supposed to look like? I thought he removed part of the building to save on construction costs. |
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 3878
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 2:53 pm: |
|
Josh,
The only thing that has been removed is the basement. (which is obviously not visible in that rendering anyway) |
Spitz
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 1687
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 2:59 pm: |
|
Josh is correct. The picture still shows 5 stories. The plan had been amended previously so that the building would only be 4 stories. The reason for amending the plan to 4 stories was to save costs by eliminating the parking deck, which was in the rear. |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 2870
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 3:05 pm: |
|
Does anyone really think there is enough room at the Beifus site for that building in the sketch? Maybe my perspective is way off, but it just looks like way too much frontage to me, given the amount of space there actually is at the pit. |
Spitz
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 1688
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 3:14 pm: |
|
The Village website says that the Village took away Beifus' redeveloper status in Nov. 2004. I guess we really showed him. (I've asked before, but nobody from the Village has ever been able to explain the significance of this. Even after Nov. 2004, there was certainly nothing different about the way Beifus was treated or in the agreements he signed.) |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 2871
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 3:22 pm: |
|
Mark, any chance you can comment on this? Is the website accurate? And if it is, what does it really mean? |
Howard Levison
Citizen
Username: Levisonh
Post Number: 554
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 3:29 pm: |
|
Spitz, the only problem is that the Village signed a Developers agreement that state Biefus is a redeveloper:
 |
Spitz
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 1689
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 3:43 pm: |
|
Yep, I guess we really showed Beifus we were serious. The story was in the News-Record. All show, like everything else. |
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 3880
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 3:48 pm: |
|
I wonder - is that why the latest Planning Board approval was given to Beifus using a different corporate name? (because the previous name had redeveloper status "withdrawn"?) |
Spitz
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 1690
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 3:59 pm: |
|
Does anyone from the Village ever read the agreements it enters into? |
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 292
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 4:47 pm: |
|
No Spitz, only opposing counsel does. |
Howard Levison
Citizen
Username: Levisonh
Post Number: 556
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 5:36 pm: |
|
One would assume Village Counsel and signatories (VP). |
Spitz
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 1692
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 5:52 pm: |
|
Someone would have to check this. Under state law, one of the reasons for designating an area in need of redevelopment is to be able to grant tax abatements. I'm not sure if in order to be granted a tax abatement, the developer has to be designated a "redeveloper." If designation as a "redeveloper" is a requiremnet to be granted a tax abatement, and Beifus was never redesignated a redeveloper, is the tax abatement and PILOT given to Beifus valid, under state law? |
Debra Davidson
Citizen
Username: Peanutslady
Post Number: 155
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 5:58 pm: |
|
From what I'm reading here it sound to me like the town of South Orange dose care at all about the redevelopment of South Orange. If South Orange really cared it would not be taking this long. I'm now getting frustrated just like the rest of you. I wish the town would not say they are doing redevelopment. The town needs to show us that they are serious about the redevelopment of South Orange. Words and pictures are fine, but that is not redevelopment at all. South Orange actions speak louder then words. South Orange if you are really serious about redevelopment then I want to see things start and continue to happen right now. Other wise I'm not going to take South Orange seriously. I will take it as a very, very bad joke. Now I want to see thing happening right now. Enough is enough. |
The Man
Citizen
Username: Bumboklaat
Post Number: 177
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Friday, April 14, 2006 - 4:11 am: |
|
My cat's breath smells like cat food. |
Politicalmon
Citizen
Username: Politicalmon
Post Number: 115
Registered: 9-2005
| | Posted on Friday, April 14, 2006 - 2:18 pm: |
|
The BOT should have a 2 fold plan - set a strict time line with Biefus & Sayid and simultaneously start talking with other developers to cover the whole project since given historical reference Biefus & co will never make the time line - In my view he obviously doesn't have the capital or can't get funding for this project. With interest rates moving up the cost of redevelopment increasing with each day the odds are not good. As this area sits idle,we lose any future tax base and have to live with a constant eye sore.
I have a strong feeling the only way this situation is going to change is when all these development & governmenal tyros are voted out of office in 2007. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page