| Author | Message | ||
     ril Citizen Username: Ril Post Number: 58 Registered: 6-2001 |
Plans for the new performing arts center seem to be moving along. I understand that the center will share the already over-burdened NJT parking lot. Has anyone considered re-configuring the entrances/exit to this lot? It's already quite difficult to exit the lot in the evenings (making the turn onto SO Ave. often requires waiting thru several cycles of the traffic light). Added traffic coming into the performing arts center will make this a nightmare. Will theater-goers be using the same circle dropoff as the jitneys, taxis and commuters? Also, while there's plenty of parking there in the evenings, there is none during the day. Will the movie multiplex have daytime showings? where would those people park? And while we wait for all this new construction to happen, could SOMEONE PLEASE LOOK AT THE TIMING OF THE TRAFFIC LIGHTS on South Orange Ave.? If they were synced, a lot of the traffic mess could be eased. Also, perhaps the police might enforce the "no blocking the intersection" rule at the parking lot exit light. And maybe change the "no turn on red" sign? Thank you. | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 150 Registered: 4-2002 |
Ril: The timing of the traffic lights on S. Orange Ave. is controlled by the county. We have made numerous requests for them to synchronize them. We will keep pushing them to make adjustments to the lights. We are currently looking at making modifications to the entrance/exits along with some other modifications. We would expect that people would primarily use the theater after the commuters have come home. Obviously there will be some parking/traffic challenges no matter what. We are also looking at adding more parking nearby. Usually movie theaters only do daytime shows on holidays and weekends. | ||
| ril Citizen Username: Ril Post Number: 59 Registered: 6-2001 |
Thanks for the quick response, Mr. Rosner. Is there someone at the county I could contact directly to ask about the traffic lights? | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 151 Registered: 4-2002 |
I don't know the person's name but it is the county engineer. If you contact the village engineer, I would think he could point you in the right direction. He can be reached at village hall (973)-378-7715. | ||
| Shelley Stile Citizen Username: Sstile Post Number: 15 Registered: 12-2002 |
I urge everyone to go to both the Village Website and SOAR's website to update yourselves on SOPAC. At the Village Website a column entitled The Village SPeaks by Village Administrator and Execctive Director of SOPAC, speaks to SOAR's concerns and issues with the present plans for SOPAC. On southorangesoar.com, you can see SOAR's offical response to that column, which also includes the latest updates on the situation. I urge all residnets of South Orange to keep themselves apprised of the on-going process. We heard rumors at the SOPAC Board meeting that Arnell was actually going to start prepping the site. Given the fact that there are so many outstanding, unanswered questions and probems with the rpesent plan, I believe that nothing should proceed on this project until ALL questions raised by Bill Dahn and SOAr are answered. At present, I personally have a mediation request in front of the State Government Records Committee to have them intercede on my behalf to have legaly requested items released from the Village on SOPAC that would once and for all, answer these questions. The Village and SOPAC have continued to refuse to release any consultant's reports or financial/business plans. Until we can see all those records, until Bill Dahn's re-pricing of SOPAC is complete, the project should go on hold. We want an Arts Center...but one that will succeed. That is all we are striving to achieve...the best possible Arts Center for South Orange. | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 224 Registered: 4-2002 |
Site preparation would still be required and can certainly be done while the plans are being reviewed and revised. Since the village announced that the project is going to be a joint venture with Seton Hall, there is still some work to be done and it gives Ms. Stile plenty of time for her concerns to be addressed and any questions answered. | ||
| mayhewdrive Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 206 Registered: 5-2001 |
What impact does the news this morning that the Harms Center is Englewood is shutting down have on the future prospects for SOPAC? (http://www.nj.com/entertainment/ledger/index.ssf?/base/entertainment-0/105038868 5161220.xml) Mark, in a prior post, you stated "The taxpayers will be liable for the deficits incurred by SOPAC." Obviously, this is a big concern. Can you help me (us) understand what is different about SOPAC? | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 229 Registered: 4-2002 |
Mayhewdrive: I did see the article and I will try and point out some differences. First, we now have a partnership with Seton Hall and they will be sharing in the ongoing expenses and deficits (if any). SOPAC's live theater will have 425 seats vs. the 1400 seats in the Harms Center. We have always maintained that it is much harder to fill a large theater especially when there are other competing venues out there (Paper Mill, NJPAC). This way we will have different programming than those theaters and certainly less expensive. SOPAC will also have income generated from the movie theater portion of the building as well as the multi-purpose banquet room (holds up to 150 persons). I do not think the Harms Center had any source of income that compares to this arrangement. I do feel that with Seton Hall involved in this project that SOPAC has become a unique project. They will have daytime classes at the theater which will help to generate business for the downtown. I think the partnership has made this project even more exciting and at the same time helps to make SOPAC financially sound. By the way, SOPAC does have a board (I am on it) and the comments posted regarding SOPAC are my personal view and does not reflect any official view of SOPAC. | ||
| noracoombs Citizen Username: Noracoombs Post Number: 7 Registered: 8-2002 |
The news of the demise of the Harms Center has me more than a bit concerned about the potential viability of SOPAC as well. I do agree that Seton Hall's participation in the project could bode well for SOPAC, but I would really like to get more information on the extent of the University's participation than that they will be "sharing in the expenses." Specifically: • What percentage of the bill and expenses will they be footing? Are they going to be an equal partner with the Village, or are they simply kicking in a couple million dollars to ensure some involvement? • Will Seton Hall be using the center strictly as a venue to a) showcase student performances and b) provide entertainment (perhaps funded by a SHU activities fee) to the student population only? Or will events produced by the University be open to Village residents and the surrounding population? • To what extent is the intention of this partnership to provide facilities for Seton Hall's theater students? And if the answer is "to a great extent," does Seton Hall plan to expand its theater department in the next few years? The reason for that question is that SHU is not known for its theater department, and doesn't have a reputation as one of NJ's best theater schools. (In fact, it doesn't as yet have a free-standing theater department--right now, theater studies are part of the University's communications department.) Unless they are planning some sort of expansion, I can't imagine why they'd want to make such a huge committment to theater studies. • Will a partnership with Seton Hall--a Catholic institution--institute any sort of censorship as to the types of performances that would be permitted there? Don't get me wrong--I think a partnership with Seton Hall has great potential. But I need more concrete details before I can be fully comfortable with the idea of SOPAC and its potential impact on my--and the Village's--wallet. | ||
| Dave Ross Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 4549 Registered: 5-2001  |
I respectfully disagree with Mark that the Harms Center's demise should not send a serious note of caution. Englewood is a community very similar to South Orange with a very large arts community and high incomes. Unlike South Orange, it is surrounded by similar wealthy communities. If they couldn't float (following 70 years of being a famous place), then there's little chance SOPAC will. | ||
| David Lackey Citizen Username: David_lackey Post Number: 2 Registered: 4-2003 |
While it is true that the Harms Center is (was) quite different, its failure should still be another red flag for South Orange in its planning of SOPAC. As a candidate for Trustee in the upcoming election, I am dismayed by the lack of tangible support for the notion that SOPAC will succeed. Like most residents, I would love to see a thriving arts center in town. However, the project has stumbled forward and seems to be cloaked in secrecy. The board of SOPAC and the Board of Trustees have not done enough to convince the residents of our village that this project is being done "the right way." Too many questions remain unanswered. If elected, I look forward to shining a bright light on this project. | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 233 Registered: 4-2002 |
Dave: I never said there is no cause for concern. With this kind of project there is always a concern. However, the projects are very different and I do not know the reasons why the Harms Center is closing other than a lack of funding. I merely pointed out some of the differences in the two theaters. Noracoombs: The final details are still being worked on but basically, Seton Hall will be a 50-50 partner in the live theater, but not in the movie theater portion. There is more info on the village web page - www.southorange.org They will not be able to censor any of the programming at SOPAC. They never asked and it is not negotiable. This will be part of a major expansion of their theater department. At this point, they have no reputation for having a theater department, but this will be a major jump start for them. We have been working on this partnership for several months and I think we can now say we can move forward with confidence knowing that not only do have the funding in place, but we have a partner willing to share in the operational expenses at the same time a real incentive to make the project succeed. Dave: Cloaked in secrecy? Maybe you would like to talk to your running mate (Eric DeVaris), who was one of the volunteers that until recently was very active in the process. His name is on the project and he was very involved in the selection of the original architect. I joined the Arts Board last fall to help get the project moving which is controlled by the SOPAC board, not the S. Orange board of trustees. The SOPAC board is made up of three trustees, the village president and five volunteers who are all residents in S. Orange. I would hope that before you start criticizing this group as an election issue, it would help if you came to a SOPAC meeting (and I do not think you have ever been to one). And by the way, if you are elected, you would still not be on the SOPAC board which after this year will have only two trustees and it goes by seniority. The reason the project has moved slowly is because we want to make sure it is financially viable and that there is a business plan that will be successful. Sometimes, it is better to move slowly and carefully. | ||
| Dave Ross Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 4551 Registered: 5-2001 |
It's better to move slowly, but the SOPAC board nees a lesson in Setting Expectation Levels. When we bought here in early '98 every newsletter made it out to be 12-18 months away. Here we are five years later and it's "12-18 months away". Nowhere was it ever communicated that there was a ten year plan. SOPAC would be smaller than Harms, but so would its seating capacity and yet the marketing costs and talent/IP rights costs will likely be similar, making SOPAC less likely than Harms to succeed financially unless it's selling $8 popcorn buckets. Don't get me wrong: I'd love an Arts Center, but I don't see a bed of roses here. My gut feeling at this point is that it probably wouldn't be happening if it hadn't been overpromised to residents in countless newsletters. (And then there was the groundbreaking PR, which in most construction endeavors typically heralds the immediate arrival of guys with yellow helmets, except for SOPAC). Now the decision being made to find any and every way to build Babel seems a tad political rather than financially practical. I hope I'm proven wrong or the sound of the crash will echo loudly. | ||
| David Lackey Citizen Username: David_lackey Post Number: 3 Registered: 4-2003 |
Mark, I agree completely that decisions must be made carefully. My criticism above relates only to the amount of information given to South Orange residents (most of whom do not attend SOPAC meetings)and the absence of a (public) feasibility study. I am fully aware of Eric's role in the project, and I am sure you realize that neither of the items above relate to his area of involvement, architecture. Please do not try to spin this as me being anti-SOPAC. My assertion is simply that South Orange taxpayers deserve to know more about the details of this project than they have been allowed up to this point. | ||
| Brian O'Leary Citizen Username: Brianoleary Post Number: 1244 Registered: 3-2002 |
I favor an arts center, and I'd like to see how it will work. We're potentially spending $10-plus million to build it, a sum that was judged too much to spend for recreational space. It would be useful to have a clear plan that people can get their arms around. I appreciate the innovation in bringing Seton Hall into the discussion, but it is also the case that the Village is not talking about the details of the plan until the agreement is firmed up. It seems a bit one-sided for the incumbents to claim "It's gonna be great" and then say "but we can't talk about it". Eric can talk directly about how he sees his role in the early stages of the arts center. I can say with certainty that, if elected, the Open South Orange slate will see it as the responsibility of the board of trustees to get the job done. I actually agree with Mark that planning carefully and moving slowly makes sense; it can and does speed up development. My difficulty is that, at the time of the last election, the incumbent ticket claimed that the arts center would start construction in August, 1999. Four years later, we're trying to cut a deal with Seton Hall. That kind of disconnect is what brought David, Eric and me into this race. | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 235 Registered: 4-2002 |
We were given advice from the architects that we were going to be able to start four years ago. None of the bids came in anywher close to what was projected by them. There had to be a total redesign of the project. It is unfortunate, but from what I read (and I was not involved with SOPAC at that time) the firm totally misled the village. My point is that Eric DeVaris was much more involved with the project at that time and he understands very well why there were delays. David: My point is if you are going to criticize, either come to the meetngs, or have a conversation with one of the SOPAC board members first. I think the web page actually put a lot of information out there and I have always given information I have to anyone who has asked. There was a feasability study done and that study was made public. The study was done in 1998. It would be unreasonable to expect information about an agreement (which will be a legal and binding contract) that we release that information until it is signed by both parties. We did release the preliminary informationg which outlines the expecations of the agreement. Dave: The Harms Center had significant fundraising problems. I would not be surprised if the center is "saved" because of this publicity and they find a major donor. Seton Hall brings a unique ability to raise funds for the theater. Also, this building has income that will be coming from two sources (move theater and banquet room) that the Harms Center did not have. We have also had interest from other larger theaters that would like to use SOPAC for their smaller productions. There is no question that it was wrong to do a groundbreaking but at that time it was expected that the project was going to begin. However, the SOPAC board voted not to rush in because there were still some design issues that needed to be corrected. Brian: I never said we can't talk about it. We can talk, I just can't give specific numbers. Basically, Seton Hall will be paying for fifty percent of the theater and banquet room and all design changes requested by them. They have no say in our programming. They will be expanding their theater program (did they even have one?) and holding classed in the downtown which will be a benefit to the downtown businesses. I will state again, I am glad I voted for the delays because I was not comfortable with the project. I would think that I should have been criticized if I had voted to go ahead with a project that I thought might fail. I thought it took some guts for us to delay the project and try to get it right instead of just building it to meet a campaign promise that we did think was realistic. | ||
| noracoombs Citizen Username: Noracoombs Post Number: 8 Registered: 8-2002 |
Mr. Rosner: • When is the SOPAC/Seton Hall partnership expected to be finalized (ie, all negotiations completed and everything signed)? • Are there any serious issues on the table that are preventing the partnership from being finalized immediately? • Will construction on SOPAC begin before the partnership is finalized? | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 237 Registered: 4-2002 |
Noracoombs: I do not want to promise a date because you can see the trouble that gets one into, but it looks like it could easily take another two months to finalize the deal. There are no serious issues holding up the final agreement, but there are attorneys who have to review every change and then the contract has to be approved by the SOPAC board and by the SHU board. Site preperation is beginning this week. There will only be preliminary work done, so that when the agreement is signed, the actual work can really get started. | ||
| Dave Ross Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 4558 Registered: 5-2001 |
Why begin anything before a legal document is signed? If it's been prudent to wait this long, why not wait until an agreement is reached? | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 238 Registered: 4-2002 |
I do want to re-state, that when I answer this type of question, that I am giving the reasoning behind the board and does not neccessarily reflect my own opinion. In this case, I thought it was ok to go ahead, but I sense certain follow-up questions and I want to make sure that it is clear that the SOPAC board has nine voting members and the Majority rules. SHU and SOPAC have both signed off on preliminary agreements and both have agreed in principal to most of the details. Both have made public announcements of the partnership, so there is no reason to believe that we won't move forward. The site preperation needs to be done and the board would like to see things done in a more timely manner if possible. The project is scheduled to go forward even if for some reason the partnership does not happen. The exact same site preperation would be needed and that is the overriding reason to move forward now. Trustee election is on May 13th. Vote Line A |
