| Author |
Message |
    
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 985
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 12:17 pm: | 
|
Miriam: I am not sure I follow your post. The tennis courts are permanent. A bubble is not a permanent structure. Are you saying that a bubble should be put where there are already courts and lights? Just in case you misunderstood, the bubble would be up from the last week in October thru the end of March.
If you are suggesting building new courts elsewhere with a bubble, that would be a major expenditure and would not really be an alternative.
This is being suggested because it would bring revenue to the village and that revenue could be used towards the recreation and open space needs. It is that simple. Tennis players would get to play indoors in the winter. Children would be given some free time (after school and before the evening). It can be a win-win situation but the downside is having a bubble in the park.
I can think of a lot of reasons not to want a bubble there including the fact that a lot of people hate the way they look. People should just state why they are ok with one or not without the bs (or the nastiness). There is no secret agenda, no special deals with a vendor, or any pressing need to do this. It was merely bought to the BOT and we postponed a decision so more information could be gathered and to allow more time for discussion.
I would prefer that IF there is going to be a bubble that it be by the pool.
Bets, I think the reason to use the Baird courts was because there are already lights there as well as being closer to the staff at the Baird center. I don't think and nobody ever said we could not use the courts by the pool because 3 of them are in the redevelopment zone.
|
kevin
Citizen
Username: Kevin
Post Number: 199
Registered: 2-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 3:24 pm: |
|
If there was snow on the ground between October through march, it would blend in.
Question: Will the installation of the bubble require the removal of trees, blocking of parking spots at the Baird, etc?
|
kevin
Citizen
Username: Kevin
Post Number: 200
Registered: 2-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 3:25 pm: |
|
Are the 3 courts by the pool in the redevelopment zone? |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 986
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 3:49 pm: |
|
Kevin: No trees have to come down. I think one parking space will be lost at most.
The three courts (by the pool)closest to S. Orange Ave are in the redevelopment zone, but that has no bearing on the bubble nor are there any plans to do anything with those courts other than to leave them as tennis courts. |
bets
Citizen
Username: Bets
Post Number: 505
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 4:25 pm: |
|
The tennis courts had to be included so the village could force out the automotive garage on the avenue. |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 989
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 4:28 pm: |
|
Bets: Wrong again, but nice try.
For those who don't know, the garage is still there and operating as it always has been. |
Mayhewdrive
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 821
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 4:36 pm: |
|
As I recall, the tennis courts were included when the Village was trying to attract a larger Supermarket to the Beifus site (which was not considered large enough as it existed) |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 990
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 4:48 pm: |
|
MHD: The thought was if a developer wanted to come in, they would need the property squared off and to provide better truck access. The developer was going to have to negotiate with any business or landlord if that is what they wanted to do. The garage owner would NOT have been forced out, but would have recieved compensation and the village would help him find another location. Those three tennis courts are on green acres property so a land swap would have had to been done ( some other parcel and we would have replaced the three courts).
For many reasons, the BOT did not want a large market (over 30,000 square feet) at that location. For comparison purposes the old shop-rite is about 12,000 square feet. The Kings in Short Hills is about 30,000 sq. feet. |
bets
Citizen
Username: Bets
Post Number: 506
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 5:00 pm: |
|
Then why place those lots into the redevelopment zone in the first place? |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 991
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 5:12 pm: |
|
bets: Which lots?
I think you should start a new thread. This one is supposed to be about the bubbles. |
doublea
Citizen
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 468
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 5:17 pm: |
|
This is a little confusing. The Village is saying that the Shoprite site is a difficult sell because most market operators want something larger. But the Village didn't want a larger site at Beifus?
One reason I heard expressed at a BOT meeting was that there was concern that the Beifus site was contaminated because it was a car dealership. As things turned out, it wasn't contaminated. |
doublea
Citizen
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 469
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 5:17 pm: |
|
Excuse the drift. |
Mayhewdrive
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 822
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 5:25 pm: |
|
The car dealership wasn't contaminated, but the supermarket was. Go figure! |
tototoo
Citizen
Username: Tototoo
Post Number: 150
Registered: 1-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 6:26 pm: |
|
Kevin, the Bubbles will NOT blend. I don't believe South Orange has ever experienced continuous snow cover from October (??) through March.
Speaking of NOT blending, picture the park in splendorious autumn hue - uh, that would be October. Yeah, the bubble blends.
Mr. Rosner, consider the foregoing a statement of why the bubble is NOT okay by me. |
tototoo
Citizen
Username: Tototoo
Post Number: 151
Registered: 1-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 6:29 pm: |
|
Kevin, the Bubbles will NOT blend. I don't believe South Orange has ever experienced continuous snow cover from October (??) through March.
Speaking of NOT blending, picture the park in splendorious autumn hue - uh, that would be October. Yeah, the bubble blends.
Mr. Rosner, consider the foregoing a statement of why the bubble is NOT okay by me. |
Miriam Sumner
Citizen
Username: Miriamsumner
Post Number: 2
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 7:35 pm: |
|
Well, this is an intersting process...Mark, to answer your question, I did know that the courts were permanent, and that a bubble would not be permanent, still a bubble would block the view of the park and the Baird, which would be unfortunate. I was very excited when I first heard about the tennis bubble because I thought it was going to be near the pool. Next to businesses and buildings, it seemed great ! The bathrooms at the pool are in need of repair anyway, and access to those bathrooms year round would be a huge improvement for playground moms, soccer players and the like. I know we were talking about $40/ hour to use the tennis bubble, about the same as West Orange Tennis club, which has gorgeous, luxurious and clean bathrooms and changing rooms, and staff devoted to the comfort and happiness of the players. I don't think anybody will pay $40/hr to play in a bubble that used the bathroom facilities at the Baird. (no changing rooms, no showers) So, if we decide that a tennis bubble is what the community wants, and if it's done right,with, say an extra staff person, in the business district, next to the pool...and thankfully, with some free time for students , it could be great, and I would support it. ( I still think we need to devote at least equal attention to finding more basketball facilities) |
NCJanow(akaLibraryLady)
Citizen
Username: Librarylady
Post Number: 1221
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 8:07 pm: |
|
I think that Miriam has some very reasonable ideas. As I posted at the beginning of this thread, there is no way that the bubble belongs at the Baird. The Pool courts are the most logical lots for this enterprise. Why can't they be placed there? Please explain.
NCJ aka LibraryLady
On a coffee break..or something like it.
|
kevin
Citizen
Username: Kevin
Post Number: 201
Registered: 2-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 9:42 pm: |
|
Tototoo - It was a tongue in cheek comment. Having lived in the area my whole life, I know how much snow we get annually. |
Diversity Man
Citizen
Username: Deadwhitemale
Post Number: 644
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 10:02 pm: |
|
This idea should not be considered at all until after the PAC, Beifus, Shop-Rite, and falling rock zone sites are completely developed.
Let the village trustees earn our trust through product, not promises.
This village government is living in its dream house in the sky, and wants us to move in.
Suburban ego sprawl.
DWM |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 994
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Friday, February 20, 2004 - 9:56 am: |
|
Miriam: I don't know where you got the $40.00/ hour figure or if that is correct. Last fall it was stated that the rate/hr would be 20 - 30% less than other clubs in Essex county.
I already stated that the bubble would be better by the pool (as did most of the BOT I think).
doublea: I think it is fairly easy to understand. I don't think the downtown or S. Orange Ave could handle a 30,000 square foot supermarekt but there are other types of development that might have worked.
We have a large supermarket in S. Orange. We should work towards seeing Pathmark make improvements to make that better market and somehow improve that awful parking lot. Then we would have both a small and a medium size market. |
Mayhewdrive
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 826
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, February 20, 2004 - 10:07 am: |
|
Mark,
I hope that doesn't mean the Village is considering buying THAT supermarket, too. 
IF a new supermarket ever does materialize in S.O. you would think logically that the forces of economics would mandate that disgusting Pathmark to renovate in order to compete. I hope! That place really is gross. Right now, it is well worth paying a few cents more to have a clean & safe experience at Kings in Maplewood. |
Sylad
Citizen
Username: Sylad
Post Number: 262
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Friday, February 20, 2004 - 10:10 am: |
|
Mark--you stated that these would bring in new revenue, how much? and what would be the net income in the most likely scenario. |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 995
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Friday, February 20, 2004 - 10:42 am: |
|
Sylad: I assume you are asking about the revenue from the bubbles. I have not seen a formal proposal so I can't say. When it is bought back to the BOT then we will all find out what the projected revenue is. I don't know when that will be but I will try and post on here if I find out or hear anything.
|
Sylad
Citizen
Username: Sylad
Post Number: 267
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Friday, February 20, 2004 - 10:46 am: |
|
Mark..Yes I was, thanks.
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page