| Author |
Message |
    
CageyD
Citizen
Username: Cageyd
Post Number: 58
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 3, 2003 - 1:16 pm: | 
|
Actually, taking Pan's idea a step further, are there any SOAR members on line here? They have tapped into a lot of disatisfied SO residents. Can they take a lead in organizing something like a protest? I almost believe that it will take some kind of public display before any real answers or progress is made. SOAR - are you out there? |
peteglider
Citizen
Username: Peteglider
Post Number: 375
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 3, 2003 - 1:39 pm: |
|
But do we really know what the hold up is? Isn't a fair amount of this in the potential developer's hands and *not* in the BOT/village?
I'm not in any way minimizing what issues there might be regarding clean-up etc, and responsibility of individuals within the government, which should be dealt with.
In reality -- can the village compel the developers to act any more quickly than they are (without providing $$ incentives??).
Is the village *not* doing something that is holding up the developers responding?
I'd be curious to pull a D&B on each of the developer's companies and see if they aren't feeling the pinch of the economy right now.
I agree there are issues about the shop rite property that we deserve to know more about.
But I believe that is distinctly different from these delays.
Yes? No?
Pete
|
Dave Ross
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 5791
Registered: 4-1998
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 3, 2003 - 2:14 pm: |
|
I think the elephant-in-the-room problem is that there should have been a title search and site inspection before the Village (ie., taxpayers) bought the place. The developer isn't going to touch the place with a 10 foot pole until it's remediated.
The developers aren't to blame one bit.
Our village president might be. |
peteglider
Citizen
Username: Peteglider
Post Number: 376
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 3, 2003 - 2:22 pm: |
|
Dave -- hasn't the village agreed to remediate? if that's the case -- then why the delay from the developer? I still see 2 distinct issues -- buying contaminated property vs getting the thing developed. -- Pete |
Dave Ross
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 5794
Registered: 4-1998
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 3, 2003 - 2:30 pm: |
|
The remediator probably isn't the developer. The Village will have to contract with a remediator to clean it (for I think about a million dollars or so). After that I think it's back in the developer's hands. |
vermontgolfer
Citizen
Username: Vermontgolfer
Post Number: 237
Registered: 12-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 3, 2003 - 3:17 pm: |
|
Pete/Dave,
I know there's a lot said by our leaders that we can't/don't want to believe, but at meetings that I've either attended or watched, it appears to me that the remediation cost is variable based on what the ultimate development will be. It's also been said that the cost of this remediation will be covered in the agreement with the developer. Now before you all go off on abatements etc., I know it could be some type of a give back to the developer but it appears they will try to make that part of the negotiation. OK, blast away! |
Yossarian
Citizen
Username: Yossarian
Post Number: 116
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 3, 2003 - 4:09 pm: |
|
There are a number of risk and insurance solutions to environmental problems like the one at the site. Does anyone know if any coverages were in place when this deal was done? If not, it's not too late to get some protection now that can keep costs from snowballing when (if?) cleanup begins. |
Washashore
Citizen
Username: Washashore
Post Number: 113
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 3, 2003 - 10:33 pm: |
|
And lest we forget - prior to the May 2003 BOT election, in which Messrs. Calabrese, Rosner, Rosen, and Taylor ran for RE-ELECTION, all of what we are now discussing was known by them but NOT by the rest of us.
BEFORE the 2003 BOT election, the Supermarket was "coming soon", and the last campaign leaflet from the incumbents re-stated the "seven reasons why" they all should be re-elected: namely, because they had done such a cracker jack job of getting things done.
The Town Attorney had screwed up royally in not protecting SO interests in the purchase of the Shop Rite site by holding in escrow funds for clean-up (See Dr. Rosen's Dec 3 post, above). They knew of this screw-up way before the May election. Their last campaign lit piece should have been "the seven lies repeated again and again and again as to why we can't allow the government and its decisions to be more open - residents might then really figure out just how incompetent and mismanaged things really are, might then throw the whole lot of us out, and re-elect rational, intelligent, competent poeple in our stead."
Now isn't that a cracker jack of an idea. |
mayhewdrive
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 583
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, December 4, 2003 - 4:19 pm: |
|
Thinking that maybe the whole "Coming Soon" joke is blown out of proportion, just for "fun", I decided to look through meeting minutes from the BOT over the past year. Following are direct quotes of some of the highlights:
Nov 6, 2002: . Irvington Avenue – Architect, Bill Scerbo is working on the design and
beautification project for Irvington Avenue. The project is almost complete as far as the development and design stages. This project should be under construction by early Spring.
Dec 9, 2002: the Irvington Avenue project is moving quickly
Jan 13, 2003: the Beifus site received County approval and demolition of the building will mostly be started in February with construction beginning in early Spring
Feb 10, 2003: construction of the Arts Center is anticipated to begin in either March or April.
April 14, 2003: The Arts Center - the construction fence has begun to be installed this week so that site preparation can start.
May 12, 2003: within a month or two major construction will begin on the Arts Center
June 9, 2003: Irvington Avenue improvement project – plans are complete and, hopefully, the project will go out to bid in the next month with a fall construction date anticipated.
July 21, 2003: 16 W. South Orange Avenue (new fish market and fish restaurant) should be opening some time in September
September 8, 2003: Village President, William Calabrese advised that Mr. Beifus is in the process of bringing in his developer’s agreement which, hopefully, will be finalized within a few weeks
October 15, 2003: the Beifus site will hopefully be under construction before January 1, 2004; 10) projected plans and specifications have finally been completed for Irvington Avenue and bids should be requested within a month or so, with construction expected to begin in Spring, 2004
Granted, the BOT doesn't have direct control over every aspect of all of these issues, but is anyone ever going to take responsibility for these endless delays.
In my professional life, projects like this with no end in sight would have long since been cancelled and the person(s) responsible for blowing them would have long since been terminated. |
peteglider
Citizen
Username: Peteglider
Post Number: 379
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, December 4, 2003 - 4:38 pm: |
|
MHD -- I agree, but I do want to make a point. In a business there is direct financial and "dotted-line" accountability. The village has neither of these to the developer/property owner. Although the village has some leverage, since it neither directly funds or manages these developers -- there really is just so much that the government can do to compel them to spend their own money at the pace we would like. (The exception being, of course, SOPAC, which is another story!). It may well be that the Newmarket and Beifus companies have fired their own accountants, project managers, or lawyers (or more likely, put them to work on more lucrative deals). Pete |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 825
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, December 4, 2003 - 5:08 pm: |
|
MHD: The fish market? Really, what does that have to do with the village? Private business owner who set an optomistic goal of September. So maybe it will be January or even early spring. They are working hard to get it open.
Pete makes a good point that some of the people who are responsible for delays do not work for the village, but for the developers.
As for SOPAC, I stated last year, that I was in favor of delaying the project until the project was reviewed, by new SOPAC board members who were being considered and hopefully an agreement with SHU to share in the project (at least finanically). I think we are getting closer but there are clearly some issues that need to be resolved. |
mayhewdrive
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 584
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, December 4, 2003 - 10:00 pm: |
|
Mark,
You are absolutely right that the Village is not directly responsible for the delay at the Fish Market. Although, I think you would also agree that the BOT is not directly responsible for increasing home values, but during the last 2 elections both sets of incumbents took credit for it.
My point is that if the new fish market is going to be discussed as part of the "redevelopment update", the implication is that the Village is actively involved. If it succeeds, they can take credit, if it fails (or in this case is delayed), they need to take responsibility.
The more important issues are the examples above where the Village IS playing a key role (Beifus, SOPAC, Supermarket) & is not "getting it done". At the BOT meeting a few weeks ago, Bill Calbrese stated something to the effect of "the redevelopment committee is my committee & we will meet when I want to meet". If he "owns" redevelopment, he should take responsibility for its failure, instead of continuosly misrepresenting to the public that it is "coming soon". |
lamppost
Citizen
Username: Lamppost
Post Number: 31
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Friday, December 5, 2003 - 11:02 pm: |
|
FYI: From what I know, the contaminated ShopRite site is not exclusively owned by our Village. A small piece is owned by Newmarket. Translation: Newmarket must be made to participate in the environmental clean up. I would like to hear an official reply. Has anyone on the BOT investigated this issue of joint responsibility? |
bets
Citizen
Username: Bets
Post Number: 426
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, December 6, 2003 - 12:30 am: |
|
Lamppost: which block and lot number? Please elaborate.
The site encompasses properties on South Orange Ave. as well as Vose Ave. They are all block 1909. The lots are (ready?) 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, & 1.
For those of us without tax maps handy, these properties begin next to the train trestle (where the first Shop-Rite in Wakefern's history opened), hang a left on Vose, and end next door to the Post Office.
So which lot is owned by the elusive Newmarket? Who IS Newmarket?
I know that Mr. Matthews posted elsewhere that the cleanup required was based solely on what was proposed; i.e., the underground and deck parking might require cleanup, but without that inclusion the cleanup would be minimal. I propose that South Orange is bound by the same Federal law to which every municipality must adhere: the site must be cleansed and cleared by the NJ DEP before any construction can begin. Parking deck or not. Parking lot or not.
Please, beware of what you hear here from posters that are so sympathetic to both sides. There is no other side to this issue. The Shop-Rite site cannot be developed without extensive environmental cleanup on its entirety.
Mr Matthews is wrong. |
J. Crohn
Citizen
Username: Jcrohn
Post Number: 735
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, December 6, 2003 - 12:46 am: |
|
"South Orange is bound by the same Federal law to which every municipality must adhere: the site must be cleansed and cleared by the NJ DEP before any construction can begin."
Bets, that's very interesting. Could you post or reference a statute confirming this?
|
bets
Citizen
Username: Bets
Post Number: 427
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, December 6, 2003 - 1:01 am: |
|
http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/glossary.htm |
kevin
Citizen
Username: Kevin
Post Number: 129
Registered: 2-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, December 6, 2003 - 1:02 pm: |
|
Bets, I don't thik that you are absolutely correct as to the lot and block numbers that you gave. I don't have the actual tax map in front of me, but I don't think that all of those lots are included in the site plan for the new development unless they are planning on tearing down the bank, Gaslight and Breitman building. I heard that the Gaslight building recently changed ownership (and it wasn't the town who aquired it).
I also don't see anything owned by Newmarket. There is one lot with VILLAGE SUPER MARKET INC listed as the owner - are they also refered to as Newmarket?
According to my records, there is no lot 7 in block 1909
1909, 1
-----------
1 SOUTH ORANGE AVENUE
TWSP SOUTH ORANGE VILLAGE
101 SOUTH ORANGE AVENUE
SOUTH ORANGE, N.J. 07079
yb: 1958
1909, 2
-----------
3 SOUTH ORANGE AVENUE
TWSP SOUTH ORANGE VILLAGE
101 SOUTH ORANGE AVENUE
SOUTH ORANGE, N.J. 07079
yb: 1960
1909, 3
-----------
7 SOUTH ORANGE AVENUE
TWSP SOUTH ORANGE VILLAGE
101 SOUTH ORANGE AVENUE
SOUTH ORANGE, N.J. 07079
yb: 1111
1909, 4
-----------
11 SOUTH ORANGE AVENUE
WACHOVIA BANK/R.E. TAXES
NC 0200 301 S.TYRON ST M9
CHARLOTTE, NC 28288
yb: 1930
1909, 5
-----------
15 SOUTH ORANGE AVENUE
CARR, HARRY + SHARON
9 TOTTY COURT
FLORHAM PARK, N.J. 07932
yb: 1900
1909, 6
-----------
19 SOUTH ORANGE AVENUE
SOUTH ORANGE ASSOC C/O AFFL MNGT
301 SO LIVINGSTON AVE 105
LIVINGSTON, N.J. 07039
yb: 1900
1909, 8
-----------
9-21 VOSE AVE
TWSP SOUTH ORANGE VILLAGE
101 SOUTH ORANGE AVENUE
SOUTH ORANGE, N.J. 07079
yb: 1915
1909, 9
-----------
25 VOSE AVENUE
VILLAGE SUPER MARKET INC
733 MOUNTAIN AVENUE
SPRINGFIELD, N.J. 07081
yb: 1929
|
lamppost
Citizen
Username: Lamppost
Post Number: 32
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, December 6, 2003 - 1:32 pm: |
|
Kevin: Very interesting!! First Question: What is the source of your tax lot records? Meaning: how accurate and up to date are they? Second Question: How come we don't have a lot 7. Did it fall off the face of the earth? It would be so easy for one of our Trustees or perhaps Village Counsel to definitively answer these questions. Perhaps one of them will. |
lamppost
Citizen
Username: Lamppost
Post Number: 33
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, December 6, 2003 - 1:51 pm: |
|
Kevin: Very interesting!! First Question: What is the source of your tax lot records? Meaning: how accurate and up to date are they? Second Question: How come we don't have a lot 7. Did it fall off the face of the earth? It would be so easy for one of our Trustees or perhaps Village Counsel to definitively answer these questions. Perhaps one of them will. |
bets
Citizen
Username: Bets
Post Number: 428
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, December 6, 2003 - 1:57 pm: |
|
Kevin,
I received my information from Village Hall. This is what was given to me:
Lot 9 - 25 Vose Ave.
Lots 8 & 7 - 9-21 Vose Ave (Haircut place, antique store maybe??)
Lot 6 - 5 Vose Ave. & 19 South Orange Ave.
Lot 5 - 15 South Orange Ave.
Lot 4 - 11 South Orange Ave.
Lot 3 - 7-9 South Orange Ave.
Lot 2 - 3-5 South Orange Ave.
Lot 1 - 1 South Orange Ave.
Guess I wasn't clear on which lot started where. Sorry about that! |
notehead
Citizen
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 777
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, December 6, 2003 - 3:16 pm: |
|
I sure do wonder how many times the town has had to replace those "Coming Soon" signs at the market site. |
kevin
Citizen
Username: Kevin
Post Number: 130
Registered: 2-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, December 6, 2003 - 9:56 pm: |
|
I didn't spend enough time looking into the facts on my last post. It looks like lot #7 wasn't on my list because it doesn't have a street number. I see it on my parcel map. It is an odd shaped parcel between the tailor/barber building (lot 8) and the Breitman building (lot 6).
Lot 9 is the liquor store which is the property that the town doesn't own yet.
lamppost: I'm not sure how 'up to date' my information is. I have a few different (pay) sources that I pull the information from.
|
Soda
Citizen
Username: Soda
Post Number: 1115
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, December 8, 2003 - 10:45 am: |
|
From the South Orange blog kept by Tracey (a self-described S.O.A.R. member, but seemingly an otherwise cool gal...):
"Balducci's in SO?
Boy, I sure do hope the Village President, Village Adminstrator, Village Attorney, BOT members, the New Market "developers" and anyone else who has a stake in what's going on over at the ShopRite site took a look at an article in Newsday yesterday. The headline alone--Fancy Foods Chain Hungry to Expand--is enough to make Villagers (at least this Villager) stand up, take notice, and salivate.
Here's the story: Evidently, Bear Sterns Merchant Banking (I'm assuming that's a division of the mighty Bear itself) recently purchased Sutton Place Group, a company that owns nearly a dozen fancy food markets--of which the remaining Balducci's in Manhattan is one. (For those of you who aren't familiar with the brand name, Balducci's is a fancy grocery that was a cornerstone of 9th St. and 6th Ave. in Greenwich Village. That location closed a while back, but there's still another location uptown.)
Here is the juiciest part of the article:
Bear Stearns Merchant Banking said yesterday it paid $50 million for Sutton Place Group and plans to reinvigorate the 11-store upscale chain with proven management in food retailing.
The investment bank intends to have 50 stores - perhaps under the Balducci banner - stretching from Washington, D.C., to Boston within five years. The group sees "a number of opportunities" in New York City and its suburban markets, said David King, senior managing director of Bear Stearns Merchant Banking.
Hello? Mr. King? I've got an opportunity for you about a half mile from my house! Yes, I know, I know--there is about a 1.5 million dollar environmental cleanup involved, but you know what? We'll work something out! Just please, please, PLEASE agree to build a new Balducci's there!!
The best part of the article: Nowhere in it does it say that any of the prospective "opportunities" come with a five-story condo complex. Misters Calabrese and Gross, are you listening? Maybe you guys at Village Hall have already investigated this possibility, but if not, PICK UP THE FREAKING PHONE AND GET IN TOUCH WITH THIS COMPANY!!!! It doesn't look like a market is coming anytime soon in our current situation--maybe moving in a new direction will ensure that "coming soon" really means something.
Later,
Tracey"
Size constraints notwithstanding, maybe the BOT ought give this idea some thought.
--Soda
|
CageyD
Citizen
Username: Cageyd
Post Number: 60
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Monday, December 8, 2003 - 1:41 pm: |
|
Soda
Have you sent this information to Calabrese via email or cornered him at the pharmacy. Your information sounds very interesting and gives me a shred of optimism |
Sylad
Citizen
Username: Sylad
Post Number: 78
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Monday, December 8, 2003 - 2:15 pm: |
|
Not sure I care what store is there, I just want good selection, good service and a clean environment. I am not sure that the demographic make up of the town will support a Balducci's. I would like it, but I can't see the seniors that use to walk to the old store liking it that much. I also wonder where they would find their employee base, im my experience Balducci's is very customer service focused with higher knowlege of food and food prep than your typical chain. |
notehead
Citizen
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 781
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 4:49 pm: |
|
I hereby volunteer a full work day (8 hours) of unskilled labor at the market site. I just want this incredibly prime property to be properly developed already, rather than sitting there year after year like a massive cement turd. If a town official will simply tell me when to be there and what to do, I will be glad to help. Perhaps if a sufficient number of my fellow South Orange residents can make a similar promise, we can force some headway on this long-standing and frustrating issue.
Similarly, if anyone would like to organize a protest at Village Hall to complain about the ridiculous lack of progress in the development of the market & other sites, you can count on me to be there holding a sign. |
doublea
Citizen
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 388
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 9, 2004 - 1:42 pm: |
|
If my understanding is correct, the Village owns the building on Vose Ave. where the tailor, barber and telephone stores are located (the Eric Wagman building). If this is correct, are these businesses paying rent to the Village? |
mayhewdrive
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 677
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, January 9, 2004 - 1:50 pm: |
|
On a semi-related note, how does the empty lot on Beifus affect the tax revenue generated (in comparision to the abondoned building that used to be there)?
In other words, does he now pay less property taxes, since there is no building to be assessed?
Also, it was questioned a while ago about how much tax revenue have we lost annually by the Village now owning the Shop Rite site (for the past 3 years) and how much does it cost annually for the interest on the bond that was floated to pay for that acquisition? I don't think an answer was ever provided.
|
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 870
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Friday, January 9, 2004 - 2:28 pm: |
|
doublea: The businesses are paying rent to the village (by the way, Eric Wagman rented space in that building and never owned it).
MHD: Beifus pays the same taxes he paid before.
I did not provide the answer to the other question but suggested that you request the exact numbers from John Gross or to go to a CBAC meeting to discuss it.
I am not trying to be evasive, but I don't remember the numbers and would rather not post from memory. |
doublea
Citizen
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 390
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 9, 2004 - 2:51 pm: |
|
Thanks Mark. Eric Wagman took our wedding pictures way back. I just assumed he owned the building. |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 875
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Friday, January 9, 2004 - 3:41 pm: |
|
Eric's son Gerald took the pictures at our wedding. Eric passed away a few years ago. He was a fixture in town and a wonderful person. Gerald has his own camera shop on bloomfield ave (in Verona) |
naksou
Citizen
Username: Naksou
Post Number: 15
Registered: 1-2002
| | Posted on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 10:13 pm: |
|
what happend to the fish market at so ave?whoo own this place now?did somebody know?did they open that place jet or they are still working there? |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 920
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 20, 2004 - 10:27 am: |
|
naksou: they are still working there and plan to open in the next few weeks.
|
lamppost
Citizen
Username: Lamppost
Post Number: 36
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 20, 2004 - 10:29 am: |
|
I think I'm going to pee in my pants. Welcome to South Orange, Naksou. |
amh
Citizen
Username: Amh
Post Number: 20
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 20, 2004 - 12:12 pm: |
|
Was it my imagination or did I see some digging at the Beifus site beginning last week? |
peteglider
Citizen
Username: Peteglider
Post Number: 439
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 20, 2004 - 12:57 pm: |
|
I saw the work at Beifus, too... (or did we have the same dream?!?)
Looked like they were taking out a couple of tanks maybe?
Pete |
Dave Ross
Citizen
Username: Dave
Post Number: 6159
Registered: 4-1998
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 20, 2004 - 12:59 pm: |
|
And there wasn't even an election the next day.  |
lamppost
Citizen
Username: Lamppost
Post Number: 37
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 20, 2004 - 6:09 pm: |
|
Dave Ross: Who is the Lamppost above? Since you know who I am please contact me privately. THIS LAMPPOST did not post that message! |
Dave Ross
Citizen
Username: Dave
Post Number: 6164
Registered: 4-1998
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 21, 2004 - 1:58 pm: |
|
Log into your profile and change your password. Also, if you post in a shared computing environment, make sure you log out when you're finished using it (see "Log out" link at top right of page). |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page