| Author |
Message |
    
mayhewdrive
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 464
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, October 30, 2003 - 9:20 pm: | 
|
OK...for anyone who didn't see today's News Record, the headline on the front page was that construction on SOPAC WILL begin on Jan 1.
With all due respect to Dr. Rosen (who was quoted saying that), I am willing to bet a hefty sum that construction will NOT begin on Jan 1. Certainly, if for no other reason than Jan 1 is a National Holiday & I would be amazed if work happens on that day. I also am quite doubtful, after the numerous "Coming Soon" signs, groundbreaking ceremony, "site prep" announcements, and white perimeter fences that were constructed.
To this, I have some questions:
1) What assurances do we have that this time this is "real"?
2) Doesn't the plan still need to go before the Planning Board?
3) If we see some "activity" in January, what is the real timeline for COMPLETION?
4) Who will be the movie theater operator?
5) Can the Village afford this project (with or without Seton Hall)?
I'm not trying to sound so negative, but I (and many others) are very frustrated with the "crying wolf" we have heard so frequently.
Can someone (Mark? Allan?) give any real assurances this time? |
vermontgolfer
Citizen
Username: Vermontgolfer
Post Number: 156
Registered: 12-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, October 30, 2003 - 9:57 pm: |
|
mhd,
good questions, I hope we can get some answers and more importantly, some action.
Maybe when we finally get all these projects done, we can have a "Coming Soon" sign burning party or something like that! |
alison
Citizen
Username: Alison
Post Number: 63
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Friday, October 31, 2003 - 9:29 am: |
|
The News Record article suggested that demolition of Sickley buildings/s starts January but that everything else would be in the spring. So-- I ask why demolish something else (that actually is perfectly attractive) only to have another hole just sit there through the winter???? |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 727
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Friday, October 31, 2003 - 9:50 am: |
|
Alison: The demolition is to the rear extension of the sickley building, not the whole structure.
MHD: Responses to your questions:
1: Personally with all due respect to Trustee Rosen, I think only the Exec. Director of SOPAC or the Chairperson of the SOPAC board should be making any statements regarding the start of construction or making any official statements regarding SOPAC. Anything I say about SOPAC reflects my personal knowledge or opinion and is NOT an official SOPAC comment or statement.
2: I do not think it needs to go before the planning board.
3: Construction time is expected to be about 18 months.
4: The SOPAC board has met with at least two movie operators and has not made a final decision yet.
5: The question can only be answered over time. There are some intangibles that need to be figured into the equation - does this bring better businesses to the village? Does this make S. Orange more of a destination? So forth and so on. Just looking at raw numbers and the operation will probably not make money for several years if ever. It is certainly more viable with SHU's participation and I for one would be very disappointed and angry if they backed out of what they had promised to do.
If you are looking for a simple yes or no answer, I just can't give it one way or the other.
Coming soon signs should not be allowed to put up until all permits and approvals are in place. Just my opinion of course.
|
Dave Ross
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 5531
Registered: 4-1998
| | Posted on Friday, October 31, 2003 - 10:08 am: |
|
The ultraviolet light from the sun will fade the ink on those Coming Soon signs in about 6-10 months. A self-correcting problem. |
peteglider
Citizen
Username: Peteglider
Post Number: 317
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Friday, October 31, 2003 - 10:26 am: |
|
...and anyone notice that the mural by the Girl Scouts/Brownie Troop on the fence/wall by SOPAC isn't completed either
...is there a conspiracy?!?
Pete |
woodstock
Citizen
Username: Woodstock
Post Number: 456
Registered: 9-2002
| | Posted on Friday, October 31, 2003 - 2:38 pm: |
|
Obviously the BOT should be pressuring the girl scouts/brownies to finish their mural or face penalties. Is there a PILOT for the mural? I assume there is, so the BOT must be falling down on the job, giving out village funds to subsidize an obviously flawed painting plan.
Waiting For The Electrician, Or Someone Like Him
|
mayhewdrive
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 467
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, October 31, 2003 - 2:51 pm: |
|
Mark,
Thank you for your response.
I am quite curious why this would not need to go through the Planning Board. That seems pretty surprising to me. Of course, that certainly could add significant more time to any project schedules.
As for the "18 months for construction time", I would think that someone would have a more specific list of milestones & timeframes (i.e. I imagine when the exterior will be completed is quite a bit different from when the facility would actually open for business)
I would just think that before an announcement of construction beginning, there would be an official project manager who could provide specific milestones to the community.
Again..not trying to be negative, but trying to ensure that proper expectations are set. |
Allan J Rosen
Citizen
Username: Allanrosen
Post Number: 19
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 31, 2003 - 2:59 pm: |
|
With due respect for Trustee Rosner I did not make an official announcement of any kind. I responded to a question by the reporter with respect to information that was being passed on to Seton Hall to give them a time line for some of their decision making. Site work will begin in January (including taking down the back of the Sickley Building). Real construction will begin as soon as possible after the winter thaw, presumably in March. The questions of viability are very important ones which have to be handled (determined) by both SOPAC and the BOT. |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 737
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Friday, October 31, 2003 - 3:07 pm: |
|
Sorry, I always thought if it was in the News-Record, it was offical. |
Washashore
Citizen
Username: Washashore
Post Number: 94
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, November 2, 2003 - 9:01 pm: |
|
Messrs Rosen and Rosner: Since you raise the issue of "viability," has the BOT conducted a feasibility analysis of SOPAC subsequent to the 1998 one that did NOT mention the NJPAC, a world class performace space located 25 minutes from SO.? Seems a bit foolhardy to plan construction fo a SOPAC without first understanding what type of programming can be sustained in such close proximity to NJPAC.
When will a true feasibility study be completed and available to the SO taxpayers, who are paying down the debt for the bonds to build it, and who are entitled to understand how viable, and for what types of events, SOPAC is best suited? |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 740
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Monday, November 3, 2003 - 9:55 am: |
|
Washashore: Personally, I don't think NJPac has anything to do with SOPAC - just too many differences in the theater mainly because of the size.
However, I think the board should discuss a feasability study and decide if a new one should be done.
|
Washashore
Citizen
Username: Washashore
Post Number: 95
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 3, 2003 - 3:19 pm: |
|
Mr. Rosner:
Thank you for your reply. Please keep me (us) posted on MOL as to its progress. |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 743
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Monday, November 3, 2003 - 3:27 pm: |
|
Washashore: Ok, next SOPAC meeting is scheduled to be on 11/13 at 7:30. I probably won't be getting the official minutes till the following week, but will try and get an unofficial follow-up sooner |
mayhewdrive
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 472
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, November 3, 2003 - 3:28 pm: |
|
Is there a "Mission Statement" for SOPAC? (i.e. what is the target audience & its intended purpose?) Is it intended to be modeled after the Paper Mill or NJPAC or Burgdorff?
I still wonder if an arts center / movie theatre / catering hall on such a small property which is trying to be "everything" without really having a focus on "anything" is really viable?
What existing facility is the closest analogy to what you envision this thing being similar to?
I bet most people here will give a different answer to that question. |
Shelley Stile
Citizen
Username: Sstile
Post Number: 35
Registered: 12-2002
| | Posted on Monday, December 1, 2003 - 8:35 pm: |
|
SOPAC's board of trustees has had a facelift and there are many new members now looking at the project. If you have any concerns or questions or pertinant information then contact Barbara Stollar who is the new president of the SOPAC board(they voted out Calabrese last week).
The facility has a theater design that is sorely lacking in theater amenities...backstage, wings, orchestra pit. Without Seton Hall's finanical participation (which looks to be the case) we must stick with this model of a theater that will not be able to accomodate most productions. Seton Hall had insisted on a redesign of the theater. SHU has stated that they have many ocncerns over the financial feasibility of the project. Duh! That is just the tip of the iceberg of the structual problems with the project.
Financially the project appears to be a nest of hornets. Lack of a good budget resulting in a facility that is sub-standard. No money for operating costs or monies to cover anticipated operating deficits projected. All that would have to covered via fundrasising.
Attend a SOPAC meeting (listed in the News Record I believe) or contact a boardmember. It will be your debt to cover when it goes under. |
Washashore
Citizen
Username: Washashore
Post Number: 112
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Monday, December 1, 2003 - 9:11 pm: |
|
If the News-Record is reading, perhaps an article would be appropriate - finally - that researches and exposes - finally - the issues mentioned by Shelley Stile in her post. So that all of the residents of S.O. might understand what some of us have been saying for years - finally. |
peteglider
Citizen
Username: Peteglider
Post Number: 372
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Monday, December 1, 2003 - 10:03 pm: |
|
so why does it seem that SHU is no longer a potential partner?
if that fails...does the current design at least allow for a good movie experience? a decent movie theater would be an asset!
Pete |
Dave Ross
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 5769
Registered: 4-1998
| | Posted on Monday, December 1, 2003 - 10:36 pm: |
|
A movie theater that size would go out of business in 2 months. |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 819
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 2, 2003 - 2:33 pm: |
|
Washashore: As Shelley points out there are several new members on the SOPAC board. Many of them have experience in the theater or related industry. I trust that they will draw their own conclusions and make a decision.
The deal with SHU is not dead and is still being negotiated. It might be 50-50 as to whether it happens but far from dead as of now.
Pete: The theater could be converted to a movie theater. Despite what Dave says, most of the movie operators claim that it would work very well as a movie theater. It would generate income but probably not enough to justify the cost of building a live theater. |
mayhewdrive
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 577
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 2, 2003 - 4:59 pm: |
|
Mark,
According to Calabrese at the Nov 24 BOT Meeting "an announcement will be made within 2 weeks" regarding the SHU partnership. That means an announcement will be made by Monday December 8.
Or is this more "Coming Soon" rhetoric? |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 821
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 2, 2003 - 5:14 pm: |
|
I hope he has an announcement to make at the meeting Monday night.
I will be out of town from 12/6 - 12/13 so I will be missing the meeting and the announcment. |
mayhewdrive
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 578
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 2, 2003 - 5:29 pm: |
|
Mark,
Don't worry, I don't think you'll be missing any announcement.
Enjoy your vacation. Gonna have MOL access while you are away?  |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 822
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 2, 2003 - 5:32 pm: |
|
no access to MOL, email or phones. I am going into hiding. |
mayhewdrive
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 628
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 23, 2003 - 4:32 pm: |
|
So, as not to drift the other threads...with Jan 1st rapidly approaching, can someone confirm that construction will begin on SOPAC in less than 10 days?
Also, I may have missed the Seton Hall /SOPAC announcement that Bill promised by Dec 8. Can someone please clarify the details? |
Allan J Rosen
Citizen
Username: Allanrosen
Post Number: 49
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 24, 2003 - 11:45 am: |
|
Mhd: As I posted to you in another thread Arnell has been given the go-ahead and should have a team in place bylate February. They could do site work earlier, but then would have to lay off, which would be self-defeating. Because of weather considerations I tend to believe actual construction will begin in March after the "thaw".
Seton Hall has pledged close to a million dollars to work with SOPAC, and further details are being negotiated (for presumably additional contributions), and I presume that Bill will make his announcement when all is wrapped up. |
doublea
Citizen
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 385
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 8, 2004 - 5:13 pm: |
|
Today as I was driving through the downtown I noticed that the two storefronts west of the trestle on S. Orange Ave. had "for sale" signs on them. My recollection is that a few months ago N.J. Transit had put these buildings up for auction and a private party had put in a successful bid. Then South Orange, which did not bid on the properties, told the successful bidder that if he closed on the property, So. Orange would take the properties through condemnation. These storefronts had been mentioned as classrooms if Seton Hall came into the project. What's the story? |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 862
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, January 8, 2004 - 5:20 pm: |
|
dobulea: S. Orange had asked NJ Transit to hold off putting the property up for auction. We told the buyer that village was considering purchasing the property (for SOPAC) and the village was not going to pay a premium for the property and would use condemnation if neccessary. At this point, SOPAC is not planning on using those buildings so the buyer is free to do what he wants.
My guess is he thought the village was interested and he could flip them for small profit if he purchased them.
|
mayhewdrive
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 674
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 8, 2004 - 7:19 pm: |
|
So does that mean that Seton Hall is officially not an equal "partner" in SOPAC?
I had heard talk that possibly SHU would make a relatively small monetary contribution, but that they are no longer a partner.
Is that why Bill's promised announcement in December never came? |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 864
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Friday, January 9, 2004 - 9:34 am: |
|
As I have stated before, I will leave any official annoucements about SOPAC to the SOPAC board or Bill Calabrese (who is on the SOPAC board). |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page