| Author | Message | ||
     jfw Citizen Username: Jfw Post Number: 39 Registered: 5-2001 |
a thousand pardons if there's already a thread about this somewhere else, but ... is anyone else getting a little concerned about this animal shelter that is going up along the access road to the SO recycling center? first (as mentioned in the 'trees' thread), they've already cut down a large swath of trees clear up to the fence at the back of farrell field. second, i'm VERY concerned about noise issues, especially given the lack of a buffer between the back of the shelter and the homes along walton avenue. the JAC site where the plans are posted doesn't mention if the shelter will be entirely indoors or not; does anyone have any idea? third, when/how was all of this approved by the planning board? | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 708 Registered: 4-2002 |
JFW: The initial plans were approved in 1998 (maybe sooner). The plans were modified and approved by the planning board in 2001. There were several articles in the local papers about the project. The shelter is to be completely indoors. The buffer will be replanted. A few neighbors who live on Walton will be working with the Jersey Animal Coalition (JAC) to help pick out the trees and other plantings. There have been some concerns voiced by some of the residents who live in the vicinity. They have met with the JAC and the village to make sure all of the concerns are dealt with and resolved. | ||
| nottimallen Citizen Username: Nottimallen Post Number: 6 Registered: 6-2001 |
My understanding is that the videotape of the October 15 Board of Trustees meeting clearly shows statements by Mark Rosner and Steve Steglitz that they were each "shocked" to find out that the shelter was to be built at the top of the hill and that the trees were already being cut down. Each Trustee thought that the shelter would be located further down the hill. Community residents who are concerned that even our Trustees did not know what they were approving (!), please come voice your concerns and wake up our Trustees at: Village Hall, 2nd Floor, Monday Oct 27 7:30 p.m. | ||
| Washashore Citizen Username: Washashore Post Number: 88 Registered: 4-2003 |
Folks: SO/M have been discussing a joint animal shelter for over 16 years. While the possible location has changed over time, the issue has ben around "forever", and the current site has been approved and "known" for at least 2 years. Since it is located in South Orange, the South Orange Planning Board, BOT, AND Town Engineer would have had to review and approve plans and financing. That any one of these groups could now express shock is indeed pitiful. If the BOT cannot read engineering plans, then they need to make sure they get the facts of design and cosntruction from their paid engineer before approving construction plans, to ensure that construction is done with a minimum of unnecessary demolition. To now act shocked, to jeopardize the completion schedule of a shelter that has been a long time in coming and desperately needed, is truly the height of irresponsibility. When will our BOT own up to their incompetence/stupidity/lack of accountability and finally say: Yes, it IS our responsibility, via the Town Engineer, to know how construction is going to occur, and to MAKE SURE that it is done correctly. Yes, it IS our responsibility to make sure environmental due diligence has been conducted on a piece of land the Village wants to buy BEFORE one penny is spent to acquire it only to find out after acquisition that the land (the former Shop Rite site) is so contaminated, they have been unable in the last 3+ years of village ownership to commence clean-up. Yes, it IS our responsibility to fully understand the impacts a 30-year tax abated residential project will have on the tax base in S.O. BEFORE granting one. Yes, it IS our responsibility to make sure that we don't bond ourselves to the limit, without making sure that tax ratables are ADDED to our town. | ||
| woodstock Citizen Username: Woodstock Post Number: 438 Registered: 9-2002  |
Sounds like Washashore is starting the next BOT election campaign a bit early. Does your ticket have a name/slogan? What does the post have to do with the animal shelter? Waiting For The Electrician, Or Someone Like Him | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 713 Registered: 4-2002 |
You have that right woodstock. But remember, Washashore refuses to give his/her name or meet with a public official. (S)he will only make statments that either can't be supported or when he can hide after giving half of a story. Steve and I both said we accepted responsibility and we did ask the questions when they came up about moving the location over two years ago. At no point did I suggest postponing the construction (and I do not think Steve did either). We suggested that a compromise be worked out without jeopardizing the project. The residents, the JAC and village official met. And as you point out washashore, the planning board is the one that reviews the plans and gives a seal of approval. It is the board's job to make sure that the process was followed and that there were no objections before voting on the issue. The one main concern that we all had was that the shelter was not going to have a negative impact on the park. We were told it would not and that it would not be visible when completed. I trust that the JAC and the engineer will make sure that proper landscaping will be done as well as take care of the other concerns that some residents who live in that neighborhood have raised. | ||
| Washashore Citizen Username: Washashore Post Number: 89 Registered: 4-2003 |
Woodstock: Ahh, yes indeed, the clock is ticking. Just 15 months from when the next BOT campaign season will begin in earnest. As to what my post had to do with the animal shelter: my post had to do with all things that seemingly get screwed up in this town by the BOT or their chosen staff, and then the BOT reacts by being "surpirsed." Ergo: the contaminated Shop Rite site wasn't done right; the Beifus site wasn't done right (overshadows pool; still don't know the results of the "developer's agreement", facade design less than in keeping with the decor of the Village); Gaslight Commons Pilot not done right (an unheard-of 30-year tax abatement); Midus Muffler not done right (sold, condemned, then bought again by Village a month later for $100,000 MORE. Two years later, still owned by Village - no tax revenue received.)The quarry with 198 units that "can't be changed" (BOT quote), to the 69 units that will be built (because of citizen vigilance, intelligence, and action). And now the animal shelter - buffer trees needlessly destroyed. Isn't there someone in town hall watching HOW things get done once approved??? | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 716 Registered: 4-2002 |
Washasore: Gee, some people disagree with you about the Gaslight Commons (http://www.southorange.org/news.asp?page=2). Looks like the PILOT was done exactly right (and by the way, the only kind of PILOT to do is a long-term one, but this just shows your lack of research). The BOT never said the 198 units was a done deal. In fact, the majority said they disagreed with the Court Order and were against development. One member of the BOT went to a meeting with residents to answer questions and said the 198 units was a done deal in the eyes of the court. Too much effort for you to give the full quote? And by the way, the BOT knew some trees had to be destroyed. I was not aware of the full extent. However, there will be new trees planted and there will be a buffer between the shelter and the park. Just as there was before. For those who might not realize, Washashore did not go to the planning board meetings to object to the Beifus proposal. I also guess he preferred a couple of burnt out buildings and two auto repair garages in full view of the pool sitting area as opposed to a new structure and new plantings. | ||
| mayhewdrive Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 456 Registered: 5-2001 |
Mark, I can't speak for anything that Washashore says, but I must agree that the weeds surrounded by a fence on the Beifus site aren't much more attractive (if at all) than the burnt out building that was previously there. I do not understand, why was the building demolished if construction was not even close to being ready to begin? At the current rate, it will be close to 1 year after demolition that construction MAY actually first begin. I think everyone is in favor of "a new structure and new plantings". But I am sure we all agree that a chain link fence surrounding a bunch of weeds is not what we had in mind. | ||
| vermontgolfer Citizen Username: Vermontgolfer Post Number: 141 Registered: 12-2002 |
woodstock, I'm glad to see you're not running on washashores ticket. You can still have my vote! | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 718 Registered: 4-2002 |
Mhd: I think Mr. Beifus did not realize how long it was going to take him to get to the next step (completed developers agreement). The demolition and removal was completed in late May. He was hoping to have the agreements in place to start construction this Fall. Since he was hoping to start construction this fall, and we did not want him tearing down a building with all the dust that creates during the summer when the pool was open. But then of course he seems to move along at his own pace. It has been about one year since he received planning board approval. It is private property and I assume he put the fence up to keep tresspassers away. | ||
| Washashore Citizen Username: Washashore Post Number: 90 Registered: 4-2003 |
VermontGolfer: Just curious. Why, exactly, were I to run in 15 months for the BOT, would you not support me? | ||
| vermontgolfer Citizen Username: Vermontgolfer Post Number: 143 Registered: 12-2002 |
Washashore, I never said I wouldn't vote for you. In fact, during a previous thread I suggested that instead of just complaining about everything that you should run for the BOT. | ||
| Washashore Citizen Username: Washashore Post Number: 91 Registered: 4-2003 |
Vermontgolfer: Your comment to woodstock that you're "glad to see you're not running on washashores ticket. You can still have my vote!" sugests that you wouldn't vote for anyone on Washashore's ticket, including Washashore. I guess I was wrong. | ||
| vermontgolfer Citizen Username: Vermontgolfer Post Number: 147 Registered: 12-2002 |
washashore, looks like you were wrong! You know what they say about assuming.  | ||
| Eric DeVaris Citizen Username: Eric_devaris Post Number: 41 Registered: 2-2003 |
Mark, You say: "However, there will be new trees planted and there will be a buffer between the shelter and the park. Just as there was before." What was there before were tall, beautiful, 60- to 70-year old trees. We’ll have to wait another 70 years to be “just as there was before” with tall, beautiful trees. For the next 70 years our children will have to live with the legacy that this shortsighted BOT left for them. Shame. Eric | ||
| Dave Ross Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 5517 Registered: 4-1998  |
Where does the buck stop? | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 721 Registered: 4-2002 |
Eric: I assume you made comments to the BOT in 1998 when the shelter was being discussed or went before the planning board in 2001 when they had a public hearing. I was at the meetings as a resident when the BOT discussed the shelter in 1998 and all I heard while sitting in the audience was from people who were in favor of the shelter and again in 2001 when I was on the BOT. It seemed that a lot of people wanted to see the shelter built even if some trees had to be taken down. I can't say I was ever a big supporter of having the shelter, but it was agreed to by the BOT before I was appointed and there was not one person who suggested that it not be built. I know it is very easy for you to sit and criticize from the sidelines, but as one who says they have been very active in the village, you sure remained silent until you saw an opening to offer criticism. I wonder why. Dave: No deer allowed at this shelter, so the buck will be going elsewhere. | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 724 Registered: 4-2002 |
Eric: By the way, the BOT voted on the agreement to have a shelter, as well as on the joint funding with Maplewood and the JAC. We did not vote on the exact location, the site plan or the trees. That was done at the planning board level. I am not trying to blame the planning board, but just merely pointing out to you which board would make that decision. And before you give me one of your "you should know" speeches, and how the BOT should override decisions of the planning board remember the whole point of a planning board is to have a system where there can be hearings and input by experts, and residents (who might also be experts). It is supposed to take some of the politics out of the process. Clearly you want to make it political. | ||
| Washashore Citizen Username: Washashore Post Number: 93 Registered: 4-2003 |
Mr Rosner: 1) The Planning Board is appointed by the BOT (or the Village President). If they don't get it right, get rid of them (the current chair person has been there, what? over 15 years???). Part of the buck, therefore, stops with the BOT (or Village President)who make the PB appointments. 2) The taxpayers of SO pay for the services of a Town Engineer and a Town Attorney, both of whom are hired by the BOT? Village President? Village Administrator? And both are charged with reviewing plans, and making sure that things the BOT/Planning Board approve get done RIGHT. If things don't get done right, then the Engineer and Attorney should be subject to reprimand, greater supervision, or job loss. And thus, the rest of the buck stops at the BOT/Village President/ Village Administrator who hires, supervises, and fires these employees. 3) Support for or against the animal shelter is IRRELEVANT to concerns about how its construction is taking place. 4) The buck you mention is surely welcome to that piece of the Aninal Shelter for which my taxes paid. It's finally accepting responsibility for THE BUCK that S.O. residents hope and pray that one day the current BOT will acknowledge as theirs. |
