Planning Board Chairman Ron Scott Bey emphasized the fact that many steps remain before anything rises on the site, but in public comment resident Rowand Clark launched into a diatribe against group homes, especially subsidized ones for veterans.
"Plainfield is inundated by homes for persons who are incapable of independent living," Clark said, claiming there are currently 44 such homes now, mostly tax-exempt. He said "50 years of wars" are the reason why there is "no shortage of veterans" for whom landlords can get $3,000 a month in VA and HUD money. Clark differentiated between a vet wounded in action and one with minimal service but having alcohol or drug abuse or "mental problems."
"Is that what we want for Plainfield?" he asked.
Clark described a process that he said would invite an "endless stream of homeless veterans" and was followed by Robin Bright, who insisted "vets with PTSD" were anticipated for the redevelopment site.
Scott Bey rejected the notion as having "no hard relationship to the plan that was written."
"Do you have a developer?" she asked.
Scott Bey said the owner has the right to say whether there is a developer. Plainfield Economic Development Director Carlos Sanchez said the property is under contract, but there are a "multitude of conditions" to be worked out before approvals.
Other concerns Monday included placement of driveways to avoid opening onto Hillside Avenue, environmental remediation, preservation of historic medical implements left at the site, how development would affect property values in the neighborhood, whether Planned Parenthood might locate there in light of the city's pre-natal and HIV issues and how to save an auditorium still inside the shuttered hospital. Board members and residents also corrected typos and unclear language in the redevelopment plan.
Historian Nancy Piwowar suggested establishing a medical museum on the site, noting Philadelphia's Mutter Museum draws 130,000 visitors a year.
Scott Bey said the public will have a chance to comment when the City Council holds a hearing on the Muhlenberg Redevelopment Plan.
The redevelopment process has many steps, starting with an "in need of redevelopment" study which may eventually lead to establishing a plan. The Planning Board and governing body work in tandem through the steps. After a relatively fallow period, the city now has dozens of projects in various stages of approvals. See the highly detailed final redevelopment plan for the largest development so far, a 212-unit, $50 million development on South Avenue that is now under construction.
Many of the doctors left a lot of artifacts including Dr. Keating and Dr. Fitch. Old medical equipment and photographs were on display to show the medical history of the hospital and the history of those who contributed to the care of area residents. There are plaques to Veterans, memorial plaques to families and family members, and all sorts of other plaques. There is the memorial tree in the lobby with all the "leaves" that have contributors' names. None of these artifacts should be lost or thrown away. The Mutter Museum attracts so many people because of many "oddities" that are included in their collection. The idea of a medical museum at Muhlenberg would probably not attract as many people as the Mutter, but it is illustrative of a use that would be compatible with other medical uses, and it would be a way to re-use some of the historic buildings that are located on the site. The suggestion was made as food for thought and to bring awareness of the artifacts that are within the walls of the hospital.
ReplyDeleteGreat idea, Nancy. Keep it up.
DeleteI nominate Nancy as the Chairwoman, Chief Financial Officer and Director of Operations of the Committee to get this done!!
DeleteJust what Plainfield needs...a group home...hey, how about more affordable housing? There's an idea that's never occurred to Plainfield before. It seems that Plainfield's idea of redevelopment is: if there is a good neighborhood where people take care of their property and pay taxes, let's ruin it....Way to go!
ReplyDeleteDAH - I am sure that the tracey campaign or the Rivers campaign appreciates your posts - but you haven't got a clue what you are talking about - there is no group home planned or approved for the property. If you had attended the planning board meeting you would have heard that - but instead you just cut and paste this same BS post every other day.
DeleteGroup home or veterans housing, same difference, same problems. Throw in the market rate housing and what is not being said, and that is probably what is being planned, with the rest nearly pie in the sky.
DeleteThank you for your 'civil' response. I refuse to respond to the vitriolic posting from Anonymous at 12:48. I will gladly respond "You were right; I was wrong" when I see no affordable housing or Veteran housing in the Muhlenberg site. Until then, empirical evidence of 30 years in Plainfield informs me otherwise.
DeleteThe in need of redevelopment was completed, RFP’s requested, received and reviewed. A developer was selected. This same developer is currently in contract with JFK to purchase the site. This same developer is the only RFP submitted that included housing for Vet’s with PTSD and other brain trauma. The developer is Community Healthcare Associates LLC or CHA – (http://www.cha-properties.com)
ReplyDeleteMy question concerning the housing was in reference to the 120 units set aside for the ‘dwelling units’ (done deal) and the potential amount of units allocated to the ‘assisted living component. If the city agreed to allow the developer to utilize both options of ‘ 120 dwelling units’ AND the ‘assisted living’ component on the site combined the number of people living on the site will certainly increase considerably. As I said before the total number of units to make this project beneficially to the developer has become so ambiguous that we won’t know the real number of housing until it’s all said and done. If the 120 units are designated for age restricted at market rate apartments, the assisted living portion will more than likely be used to house Vets who are incapable of fully functioning on their own. The city and planning board should share with the community the precise number of allowable residents that could occupy the ‘assisted living’ component of the plan.
Again, CHA is the developer under contact to purchase and develop the property, when they submitted their RFP their primary focus was for housing for Vets with PTSD and other brain trauma.
Ron, since I know you read this blog daily – okay I was wrong about the legislation (but not totally incorrect) that I mention last night. However what it really says is more interesting than what I originally thought - the bill (A3500/3050) is concerning repurposing qualified heath care facilities, tax credits and the state’s financial support for a facility that will not destabilize the supply and delivery of acute care health service in the market. In this case the market being JFK. Since CHA the developer is proposing healthcare on the site I can’t imagine they wouldn’t want to take advantage of these tax credits. Could this be construes as a non-compete (if you want the tax benefits) clause? See here for www.njleg.state.nj.us/2012/Bills/A3500/3050_I1.HTM
The in need of redevelopment was completed, RFP’s requested, received and reviewed. A developer was selected. This same developer is currently in contract with JFK to purchase the site. This same developer is the only RFP submitted that included housing for Vet’s with PTSD and other brain trauma. The developer is Community Healthcare Associates LLC or CHA – (http://www.cha-properties.com)
ReplyDeleteMy question concerning the housing was in reference to the 120 units set aside for the ‘dwelling units’ (done deal) and the potential amount of units allocated to the ‘assisted living component. If the city agreed to allow the developer to utilize both uses of ‘ 120 dwelling units’ AND the ‘assisted living’ component on the site combined, the number of people living on the site will certainly increase considerably. As I said before the total number of units to make this project beneficially to the developer has become so ambiguous that we won’t know the real number of housing until it’s all said and done. If the 120 units are designated for age restricted at market rate apartments, the assisted living portion will more than likely be used to house Vets who are incapable of fully functioning on their own. The city and planning board should share with the community the precise number of allowable residents that could occupy the ‘assisted living’ component of the plan.
Again, CHA is the developer under contact to purchase and develop the property, when they submitted their RFP their primary focus was for housing for Vets with PTSD and other brain trauma.
Ron, since I know you read this blog daily – okay I was wrong about the legislation (but not totally incorrect) that I mention last night. However what it really says is more interesting than what I originally thought - the bill (A3500/3050) is concerning re-purposing qualified heath care facilities, tax credits and the state’s financial support for a facility that will not destabilize the supply and delivery of acute care health service in the market. In this case the market being JFK. Since CHA the developer is proposing healthcare on the site I can’t imagine they wouldn’t want to take advantage of these tax credits. Could this be construes as a non-compete (if you want the tax benefits) clause? See here for www.njleg.state.nj.us/2012/Bills/A3500/3050_I1.HTM
Robin B
DMV is closing their offices in S. Plainfield next month. This means the nearest office will be some distance away. We have an inspection station. Is there somewhere in Plainfield we can get them to relocate?
ReplyDeleteWhat continues to be omitted from these discussions is the amount which will paid to the City of Plainfield by the Developer? The project sits on want I believe is 9 acres. If this were residential property, assuming each home would occupy one quarter acre, there is the prospect of 36 homes. If each home paid say, $9,000 per year this would gross the City $324,000, with of course the inevitable annual escalations. Many other factors must be considered, not the least of which are the alternatives, if any, if the deal does not materialize. In any event, it would be interesting to know what the the PILOT , or TAX, whatever the appropriate word is, provides? Bill Kruse
ReplyDeleteBill - contributions to tax base in city are definitely important - especially since the property currently contributes $0. As for your math you are forgetting that the city itself only gets maybe 55% of collected taxes so your $324,000 is more like $178,000.
DeleteA pilot would get you a lot more than $324K AND the city would get 95% of whatever that figure is. South Avenue project is a perfect example of that. If memory serves the properties "pre-development" brought in about $85,000 to the city itself. With the development the city gets about 50% more than that in year one and it escalates from there - by the end of the pilot the differential is staggering - I believe it was $6 or $7 million more in collected taxes with a pilot than just having a few rental house that were falling apart and some empty commercial space that was contaminated.
Bill-- The prospects of the 36 or so potential homes creating the amount of money as a 120 unit veterans and market rate housing cannot be compared. Plus the government checks for each vet...
ReplyDeleteAs said by a gentleman at the mic last night, $3,000 per veteran per month x 120 units is $360,000 per month in gross profit (and that's assuming it's 1 unit per vet!). That's $4,320,000 a year! The taxes on a facility like that will gross way more in taxes than 36 single family homes, unfortunately, even though that's what I'd like to see as well.
The city should have kept the possibility of eminent domain in the cards in the redevelopment plan. We should have redesigned that campus as a medical facility and marketed the site through a nationwide firm that is seasoned in that type of work. If JFK didn't want to play ball, then seize the empty hospital and force them out. With the revelation of JFK now being sold to a major chain, this is the time for the city to pressure them. In fact, JFK may at this point want to get rid of the hospital more than ever in order to get rid of the debt and be in a better position in a takeover or merger. Seize that sucker right from under them. We should've asked ourselves at the time, "How much will our community be willing to pay in possible legal fees to have control over the future of a vital resource and former high paying employment facility in a relatively nice area?" How much would you pay? To me it's priceless. Fight for your future. Hire true professionals that have a proven track record and portfolio in these types of situations. Google around if you have to. Read some articles, do some research and do it precisely.
And while you're googling, check out this article of how CHA has worked with Jerry Green since 2013 to sponsor a bill for tax credits to turn NJ's ex-hospitals into revenue-generating "multitenant healthcare facilities". This ending has obviously been in the works for a while: http://www.njbiz.com/article/20130129/NJBIZ01/130129825/hospital-repurposing-could-get-assist-through-legislation
But what is interesting is that the other hospitals that CHA has been involved in do not have veterans housing components at all. They're just medical arts centers, like in Paterson and Jersey City.
The city facilitated and engineered this failure we're about to receive all for JFK to just walk away debt free and this new entity to make money hand over fist while being a detriment to services and property values (and their neighbors in general). What are we gaining from this? We lose more quality of life by having the 120 units than leaving the facility as is.
Ron Scott Bey said 120 market rate units. Veterans housing would be above and beyond that, so maybe we'll actually end up with something on the order of 250 total dwelling units, and perhaps even more. If this is the case, clearly the city is not being very straightforward.
DeleteWhen I read on TAP Into Plainfield that Chief of Staff John Stewart, Jr. prognosticates the Muhlenberg auditorium as a "performance and cultural arts space", I get the feeling we're at the point of pulling rabbits from a hat to distract from what is going on, where residents in the city get 5% what sounds nice vs. 95% no one wants, save for the developer and a city administration drunk on development at any cost.
We get what we pay for. When the decision was made to turn Muhlenberg into a land and zoning issue, it was no longer a healthcare issue. True, there may never have been a single buyer willing to swoop in and save the day, but by enlisting healthcare professionals and entities, and those with strong ties to the industry (legal, finance, etc.) from the outset, partnerships and collaboration would likely have yielded something very different, and a healthcare institution we would have been proud to have in the city.
This is my favorite line from Alan's post: "so maybe we'll actually end up with something on the order of 250 total dwelling units, and perhaps even more."
DeleteOr maybe we will get a giant ice cream factory that makes ice cream and also secretly makes medication for PTSD and then - after hours I bet it will turn into a nightclub that holds 5 million people that they bring from all over the world and they make lots of noise and then I bet it becomes a medical mall and provides medical services and closes in the evening and turns out to be a boring property that provides services to city residents.
Good lord the guessing and pontificating and nonsense is amazing.
Between the RFP the selected developer (CHA) presented and the legislation that Assemblyman Jerry Green put forth in 2013 (and is now law) on re-purposing of closed hospitals, you cannot dispute or cover up facts. The writing is on the wall and you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to connect the dots. The number of livable units on that site will surely be more than 120 unless this project is stopped in its’ tracks. Because it’s an election year for Mayor of Plainfield please stop trying to influence people that what’s happening really isn’t. People we have to unit, fight and reject any housing on that site. Enough is enough. http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2012/Bills/A3500/3043_R2.HTM (correct link).
DeleteR.