161 Maplewood Avenue development

Ohno60?

Really?

Let's just say they have not been a particularly accurate source in the past, starting with their name. The building they opposed still isn't 60 feet tall. 

ml1 said:

Ohno60?

Really?

Let's just say they have not been a particularly accurate source in the past, starting with their name. The building they opposed still isn't 60 feet tall. 

Give it time. 

What is the actual height?  I think the back part goes up to 5 stories.

jamie said:

What is the actual height?  I think the back part goes up to 5 stories.

the front is one floor of retail at ground level and two residential floors above. In the back where the ground slopes, the (mostly) underground garage is exposed. 

Point is, it's not the 6 stories the opponents implied. But more importantly the building hasn't destroyed the village. 

nohero said:

Give it time. 

Facts Matter

The main issue, for me, regarding the post office was the town gave the developer a sweetheart deal which they didn't need. 

According to Google Earth, the height of the Clarus at its corners, going clockwise from Starbucks, is 13 meters (42 1/2 feet), 14 meters (46 feet), 16 meters (52 1/2 feet) and 15 meters (49 feet).

The rooftop service unit adds 2 meters (6 1/2 feet).

DaveSchmidt said:

According to Google Earth, the height of the Clarus at its corners, going clockwise from Starbucks, is 13 meters (42 1/2 feet), 14 meters (46 feet), 16 meters (52 1/2 feet) and 15 meters (49 feet).

The rooftop service unit adds 2 meters (6 1/2 feet).

So from the lowest corner it is 59 feet tall in total. Pretty close to 60 feet.

yahooyahoo said:

So from the lowest corner it is 59 feet tall in total. Pretty close to 60 feet.

Well, the meters are rounded, so give or take a couple of feet. And the rooftop unit isn’t visible from the street, as far as I recall, so some may argue that it shouldn’t count.

ETA: Also, the ground below the rooftop unit is higher than the ground at the tallest corner, so there isn’t really any plumb line in the building that would equal 16 plus 2 meters.

However tall it is, it is a major improvement over what was there before, both aesthetically and as a contributor to the town in terms of land use and quality of life

yahooyahoo said:

The main issue, for me, regarding the post office was the town gave the developer a sweetheart deal which they didn't need. 

My main issue regarding the post office was that postal delivery was then moved to Union County. 

DaveSchmidt said:

yahooyahoo said:

So from the lowest corner it is 59 feet tall in total. Pretty close to 60 feet.

Well, the meters are rounded, so give or take a couple of feet. And the rooftop unit isn’t visible from the street, as far as I recall, so some may argue that it shouldn’t count.

it's seems a little silly to me for anyone to count a part of a building that isn't even visible from the ground when trying to argue that it would tower over the village. And I'm pretty sure it wasn't in the renderings when people were claiming the 60 foot height. 

We could rehash all this, but the bottom line is we're talking about a group that wasn't above fudging some of the info they were sharing back then to make their point. 

So I'm just pointing out that I personally am going to be skeptical of any pronouncements they make about potential future developments.

Other people can take them at their word if they choose. 

“ I know we all shared the desire for transparency,” Borsellino said. “But we have so little transparency when it comes to this redevelopment.”

I concur 

The TC is using the lawsuit for cover. My guess is they are negotiating a settlement that will be in favor of the developer.

yahooyahoo said:

The TC is using the lawsuit for cover. My guess is they are negotiating a settlement that will be in favor of the developer.

If this gets onto one of them prediction gambling websites, my bet will go with your guess.

Formerlyjerseyjack said:

yahooyahoo said:

The TC is using the lawsuit for cover. My guess is they are negotiating a settlement that will be in favor of the developer.

If this gets onto one of them prediction gambling websites, my bet will go with your guess.

Well, there is a lawsuit, and there are negotiations (as there always are with a lawsuit). As to whether any settlement "favors" the property owner vs. what the potential outcome of a full litigation would be, that would be a judgment call.

While I appreciate the added value to my property with redevelopment it would be nice if the new projects also assumed some of the tax burden. In a couple of years once I’m able to freeze, this too shall pass. (The freeze would really be nice if I didn’t still have to pay the higher taxes in advance but that’s a discussion for another thread) 

The Clarus received a short term 5 year tax abatement, far shorter than the 30 year PILOTs handed out to developers by many municipalities. 

I suppose whether or not that was a sweetheart deal is in the eye of the beholder. 

ml1 said:

The Clarus received a short term 5 year tax abatement, far shorter than the 30 year PILOTs handed out to developers by many municipalities. 

I suppose whether or not that was a sweetheart deal is in the eye of the beholder. 

Yes, they got a 5 year tax abatement. They also got $200k from the Township in demolition costs. They didn't have to build ANY affordable units. The Township built a sewage line connection for The Clarus, and the surrounding lots were repaved after the utility upgrades.  All at our expense.

the_18th_letter said:

While I appreciate the added value to my property with redevelopment it would be nice if the new projects also assumed some of the tax burden. In a couple of years once I’m able to freeze, this too shall pass. (The freeze would really be nice if I didn’t still have to pay the higher taxes in advance but that’s a discussion for another thread) 

With the new combined PAS-1 form, senior freeze is not the saving it previously was.  There is now a maximum amount that seniors can receive in tax relief from senior freeze + ANCHOR + StayNj, with StayNJ being the largest benefit for most who qualify. Those new to the senior freeze program gain little or nothing from the program, other than establishing their base year. Plus, these programs need to be funded each year in the State budget.  

yahooyahoo said:

Yes, they got a 5 year tax abatement. They also got $200k from the Township in demolition costs. They didn't have to build ANY affordable units. The Township built a sewage line connection for The Clarus, and the surrounding lots were repaved after the utility upgrades. All at our expense.

According to the township’s tax projections, the abatement was worth roughly $225,000.

I was curious to see how close the projections came to reality, but I was unable to find property tax records for the Clarus online.

yahooyahoo said:

ml1 said:

The Clarus received a short term 5 year tax abatement, far shorter than the 30 year PILOTs handed out to developers by many municipalities. 

I suppose whether or not that was a sweetheart deal is in the eye of the beholder. 

Yes, they got a 5 year tax abatement. They also got $200k from the Township in demolition costs. They didn't have to build ANY affordable units. The Township built a sewage line connection for The Clarus, and the surrounding lots were repaved after the utility upgrades.  All at our expense.

some of those improvements benefited the entire town, particularly the sewage upgrade. Basements in the village, including Kings, were prone to raw sewage flooding their basements.

I get you think it was all a giveaway that benefited only or mostly JMF. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that. IMHO Maplewood was and is better off with the Clarus than the likelihood of years of an abandoned building in the center of town. 

ml1 said:

some of those improvements benefited the entire town, particularly the sewage upgrade. Basements in the village, including Kings, were prone to raw sewage flooding their basements.

I get you think it was all a giveaway that benefited only or mostly JMF. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that. IMHO Maplewood was and is better off with the Clarus than the likelihood of years of an abandoned building in the center of town. 

Option would have been to renew the post office's lease.  There were benefits to having a full service post office in town.  

joan_crystal said:

ml1 said:

some of those improvements benefited the entire town, particularly the sewage upgrade. Basements in the village, including Kings, were prone to raw sewage flooding their basements.

I get you think it was all a giveaway that benefited only or mostly JMF. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that. IMHO Maplewood was and is better off with the Clarus than the likelihood of years of an abandoned building in the center of town. 

Option would have been to renew the post office's lease.  There were benefits to having a full service post office in town.  

I'm not arguing for or against The Clarus, what's done is done. I'm just saying the TC gave JMF a sweetheart deal, as they have done with several developers around town.

joan_crystal said:

ml1 said:

some of those improvements benefited the entire town, particularly the sewage upgrade. Basements in the village, including Kings, were prone to raw sewage flooding their basements.

I get you think it was all a giveaway that benefited only or mostly JMF. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that. IMHO Maplewood was and is better off with the Clarus than the likelihood of years of an abandoned building in the center of town. 

Option would have been to renew the post office's lease.  There were benefits to having a full service post office in town.  

aside from passport applications, what benefits did we get from the former post office we don't have now?

And do they outweigh having a community bank and a fine restaurant, and other businesses in the space?

yahooyahoo said:

joan_crystal said:

ml1 said:

some of those improvements benefited the entire town, particularly the sewage upgrade. Basements in the village, including Kings, were prone to raw sewage flooding their basements.

I get you think it was all a giveaway that benefited only or mostly JMF. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that. IMHO Maplewood was and is better off with the Clarus than the likelihood of years of an abandoned building in the center of town. 

Option would have been to renew the post office's lease.  There were benefits to having a full service post office in town.  

I'm not arguing for or against The Clarus, what's done is done. I'm just saying the TC gave JMF a sweetheart deal, as they have done with several developers around town.

what better deals do you think the TC has been turning down to give away these sweetheart deals?

ml1 said:

yahooyahoo said:

joan_crystal said:

ml1 said:

some of those improvements benefited the entire town, particularly the sewage upgrade. Basements in the village, including Kings, were prone to raw sewage flooding their basements.

I get you think it was all a giveaway that benefited only or mostly JMF. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that. IMHO Maplewood was and is better off with the Clarus than the likelihood of years of an abandoned building in the center of town. 

Option would have been to renew the post office's lease.  There were benefits to having a full service post office in town.  

I'm not arguing for or against The Clarus, what's done is done. I'm just saying the TC gave JMF a sweetheart deal, as they have done with several developers around town.

what better deals do you think the TC has been turning down to give away these sweetheart deals?

It's not a matter of turning away other deals, it's about giving away too much while negotiating the deal that's on the table. Vic Deluca said the abatement was necessary to make the project financially viable. The building generates well over $1 million per year in rental revenue.  There's no way a $300k tax abatement made the difference between "go" or "no go" for the developer.  We got out negotiated by a developer that has revenue in the hundreds of millions per year.

This is what David Huemer said at the time:

“I think you should vote no…” said former TC member David Huemer. “You’re going to give [the developer] about a $320,000 tax break over five years. If that’s what it takes to get this project [done] that’s another sign this project is not in the best interest of Maplewood.”

Two of the five TC members voted no to the abatement.

ml1 said:

aside from passport applications, what benefits did we get from the former post office we don't have now?

And do they outweigh having a community bank and a fine restaurant, and other businesses in the space?

Reliable mail delivery.  Ever since mail delivery switched from Maplewood to Union, we have been plagued with mail delivery issues.  When mail was delivered from Maplewood, it was possible to go to the back door of the post office and get the matter resolved.  Reaching anyone at the Union Post Office became an impossibility.   

joan_crystal said:

ml1 said:

aside from passport applications, what benefits did we get from the former post office we don't have now?

And do they outweigh having a community bank and a fine restaurant, and other businesses in the space?

Reliable mail delivery.  Ever since mail delivery switched from Maplewood to Union, we have been plagued with mail delivery issues.  When mail was delivered from Maplewood, it was possible to go to the back door of the post office and get the matter resolved.  Reaching anyone at the Union Post Office became an impossibility.   

do you have data on how plagued the township has been by issues since the switch, or just anecdotes?

yahooyahoo said:

ml1 said:

yahooyahoo said:

joan_crystal said:

ml1 said:

some of those improvements benefited the entire town, particularly the sewage upgrade. Basements in the village, including Kings, were prone to raw sewage flooding their basements.

I get you think it was all a giveaway that benefited only or mostly JMF. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that. IMHO Maplewood was and is better off with the Clarus than the likelihood of years of an abandoned building in the center of town. 

Option would have been to renew the post office's lease.  There were benefits to having a full service post office in town.  

I'm not arguing for or against The Clarus, what's done is done. I'm just saying the TC gave JMF a sweetheart deal, as they have done with several developers around town.

what better deals do you think the TC has been turning down to give away these sweetheart deals?

It's not a matter of turning away other deals, it's about giving away too much while negotiating the deal that's on the table. Vic Deluca said the abatement was necessary to make the project financially viable. The building generates well over $1 million per year in rental revenue.  There's no way a $300k tax abatement made the difference between "go" or "no go" for the developer.  We got out negotiated by a developer that has revenue in the hundreds of millions per year.

This is what David Huemer said at the time:

“I think you should vote no…” said former TC member David Huemer. “You’re going to give [the developer] about a $320,000 tax break over five years. If that’s what it takes to get this project [done] that’s another sign this project is not in the best interest of Maplewood.”

Two of the five TC members voted no to the abatement.

the fact that the vote was 3-2 suggests reasonable people can disagree about whether or not that amount of money spread out over 5 years was too much. 

In my opinion the infrastructure upgrades alone were were worth that much to the village.