Friday, August 7, 2015

Planners Hear South Avenue Proposal

Details on the city's largest development proposal emerged Thursday at a Planning Board hearing, including the news that the developer will be seeking a tax break.

Sleepy Hollow Developers LLC proposes 212 luxury apartments in two four-story buildings on South Avenue next to a popular small park. Amenities will include a fitness center, a meditation room, indoor and outdoor fireplaces and a dog walk. Attorney Andy Norin described the expected residents as affluent, a type known as "walking wallets" who will spur further development in the city. The parent company, JMF Properties, owns 1,200 residential units and will be making a $50 million investment in Plainfield, Norin said.

Before Norin and others made their presentations, Mayor Adrian O. Mapp's chief of staff, John Stewart, gave a "message from the mayor" noting the development will bring seven full-time jobs and 300 construction jobs and the company will make a $10,000 annual contribution for upkeep and programs at the park. Stewart is the mayor's designee to the board.

Architect Angela Kostelecky explained the design was intended "to create a sense of place"and a "village-like appearance" for the target demographic of young adults and empty nesters, and engineer Brett Skapinetz testified on green space and storm water management. Planning Director William Nierstedt said the PMUA wants a capacity analysis for sewage because they are "very uncertain" that the existing system can handle it.

"Do it, or they will do it and bill you," Nierstedt said of the analysis.

As the evening wore on, Scott Bey told Norin the engineer would be his last witness.

"We're going to finish at 9:30 tonight, because we're not getting to the report," Scott Bey said, referring to a long list of variances to be addressed.

Board engineer James Giurintano then questioned Skapinetz on technical issues including garage design and parking.

Developer Joseph Forgione said from the sidelines, "We're not trying to solve anything that we believe works."

"This is my meeting," Scott Bey said.

"This is my meeting, too," Forgione responded.

Giuruntano continued with his list, including landscaping, lighting and trees to replace those that will be removed during construction. The board also heard from traffic engineer Craig Peregoy on peak travel times and reasons why only 1.4 parking spaces per unit were allotted, mainly the access to train and bus travel. Occupants will be assigned one space per unit and the rest will be first come, first served. Overflow parking will be on the street. Planner John McDonough said all the lots on the 4.74 acre site will be merged into one, and Forgione described a bike share plan for residents.

Residents' questions revealed more details. Robin Bright asked about rental rates and Forgione said one-bedroom units would go for $1,650 to $1,800 and two-bedroom units would be $1,875 to $2,000. Bright also asked about tax breaks and Economic Development Director Carlos Sanchez said a "payment in lieu of taxes," or PILOT agreement will be up for discussion at the Aug. 10 City Council meeting and up for a vote at the Aug. 17 meeting.

Donna Albanese, whose family has operated the Dairy Queen near the site since 1975, said in public comment she was thrilled by the development proposal. As a leader of the Plainwood Square Merchants Association and the Special Improvement District, she said businesses are also "thrilled to see a high-scale development on South Avenue."

The meeting ran on past 11 p.m. without a vote. Scott Bey said it will continue without further notice on Aug. 20 and the board will only hear further testimony from the engineer.

--Bernice

15 comments:

  1. Bernice,
    As President of the Special Improvement District, we do NOT take positions on development unless it involves business in city of Plainfield. For Ms. Albanese to state that we, the PSID are in favor of the loss of more businesses on South Avenue is absolutely erroneous. Considering businesses in Plainfield pay exorbitant taxes it behooves me to understand why apartment developers will get a tax break. I also live in Plainfield and pay those same taxes on my house. I pay the PMUA sewer bill also for both my properties and if upgrades have to be done what is going to happen to my charges then. Someone has to pay the bills. Whose businesses will really benefit from this development so close to Fanwood? This will spur business development along the South Avenue corridor in Fanwood while Plainfield gets an uncompensated burden on our infrastructure and our schools.
    Nimrod Webb
    PSID President

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I believe she stated her position with the SID and the merchants' association as part of her credentials, along with her family's longtime business, but I don't think she was trying to speak for everyone. Sorry if that was the impression.

      Delete
  2. I completely agree with Nimrod's assessment of the situation. Pilot program just means shifting the tax burden on current residents. 212 apartments means increased stress on Plainfield's infrastructure which means increased charges to residents to support that new infrastructure. Why this big push for apartments in Plainfield. Drive around plainfield and see how many vacant houses there are around town. Is that not evidence that there is not a strong demand for incoming residents. Do not slice up the edges of Plainfield to provide neighboring towns sub-boroughs for their communities. Plainfield deserves better than that.

    If you think people are willing to pay $2000 a month to live in Plainfield, the city should show them some houses and help them become true residents of this city.

    Richard Stewart

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is this sort of thinking that has caused Plainfield to be left behind for decades. There is a group in this city that really needs some self confidence. A new development comes in and half of the negative Nancy's say "we don't need this development cause its just going to make Plainfield look like Elizabeth etc etc" while the other half says "who is going to pay that rent, Plainfield can't get that rent, we aren't good enough to get that rent, we are just sad old forgotten Plainfield". The sad sack crowd will never change - they can snatch defeat from the jaws of victory at the drop of a hat. But they can be entertaining to laugh at.

      And as for home buying - look at the trends in the country, younger people do not want to buy homes, they want rental communities with amenities, not property with responsibilities.

      And just one more tidbit for the group of self loathing Plainfielders - go drive through Fandwood, Garwood, Cranford and other towns along the RVL and tell me what is being constructed within walking distance of train stations - thats right, nice apartment complexes. I guess all those developers and cities are the dumb ones and we are the smart ones. Maybe we go back to the horse and buggy and really show them.

      Nimrod - you should resign your post as President of the SID. As far as I can tell you have discredited yourself by saying that the retail locations on South Avenue don't want access to a captive audience of 300 +/- new customers.

      Richard - I am impressed to see that you have finally broken with Jerry Green. Good for you coming out against a development that he is supporting. I am not impressed with your vision or confidence in the city but I do congratulate you on taking a stand against your employer - sorry, I meant mentor.

      Delete
    2. To you anonymous 11:58, just because someone questions the details of a project does not necessarily mean they are opposed to said project or moving Plainfield forward in a positive direction. I was at the meeting last night and had quite a few questions. Let me just say, overall I was not impressed with the architectural design of the building, I thought some of the other projects the developer did would be more aesthetically suitable (it’s all about change). However, I said it before and I reiterate, that location IS ideal for the type of development being proposed. As a realtor, of course I would love it if they were condos for sale, but I don’t take issue with the proposed rent structure as I find it being in line with market rents. Anonymous 11:58 before you start passing judgment, please take note, because I have concerns about the tax abatement and the sewer services doesn’t make me or anyone else with the same concerns a “negative Nancy” or a member of the “sad sack crowd”. I think most stakeholders here in Plainfield all want the same thing; we would love to see positive improvements to Plainfield that would entice more business owners to set up shop here. Most of all, we would love to see a decrease in our property taxes and increase in our property value. One other thing, Jerry Green said he was staying out of Plainfield’s business so I don’t see the need for you to toss his name around as a champion of this project.

      Robin Bright

      Delete
    3. Your insults are funny since they show you are more obsessed with individuals than facts. Your bitterness is sad because it shows you let others dictate your level of composure and respect to people. But your choice of anonymity shows the level of conviction in your own words (or lack there of). Good luck with all that though!!! ;-)

      Richard

      Delete
    4. Don't you dare try to compare Plainfield to Fanwood, Garwood or Cranford. That is unless you can tell me what streets to ride down in those towns to see trash and people hanging out as they do on Park Ave and Front Street. Or do you think improvement is only for certain parts and people of Plainfield. South Ave between Leland and Terrill is still Plainfield, you can't separate that section is not separate from all the good and bad Plainfield has to offer.

      Delete
  3. The mention of sewer capacity is on point. Some of the sewers in this city date back to 1894. There is no telling how old the South Ave sewers are unless testing is done. This eastern portion of the City was hit hard during the 1973 flood, and fortunately such destruction has not been seen since. But with so much development sewer capacity, run off, and possible flooding must be seriously looked at. The PMUA in this case is looking out for the public interest.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One of PMUA's original mandates was to revamp the sewage system, and a significant sum was supposedly spent in its early years just for this purpose. It's hard to imagine they would have neglected this portion of the system that is under one of the city's main commercial arteries. So maybe they actually know what they're saying. But still, are we supposed to stop progress? They get a pretty penny for hook-ups, $2300 per unit, so that's roughly $500,000 that ought to be plowed into whatever they need to do to make this fly.

      A second point- I thought I heard that 10% of the projected labor force would be locals. This is too low a figure for special tax treatment, especially when only seven permanent jobs are being created. The 300-person estimate for construction jobs that are only temporary should have a larger percentage of local labor.

      Delete
  4. 300 construction jobs. How many of those jobs will go to locals? The manpower and skill is here. But once again will the locals be shut out of a construction project here in the city. 50 million dollars is alot of money to invest. And it sounds good but to whose ears? Organizing for peace and progress for all. Norman X Johnson

    ReplyDelete
  5. PICK UP THE WORKERS AT MADISON AND W FRONT ST

    ReplyDelete
  6. Well I work everyday and I still cannot afford to pay 1650 for a one bedroom apt or two for that matter, but I guess that does not matter because they are not building for those that already live here, it's to attract the six figure professionals from wall street.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's not a bad thing -- you need money to make money. Mixed demographics do well and everyone benefits; yes, there can be downsides but the potential positives and quality of life improvements outweigh the negatives by far.

      Delete
  7. The developer sits on two hospital boards, for $50 million he could build Plainfield a hospital.

    ReplyDelete
  8. As a resident an employee of Plainfield, I do not earn enough to afford the 2 bedroom apartment needed. Will this development provide Fair Market Rents or Rental Assistance or even Low Income Housing Tax Credits for the people who are just looking for a clean, safe productive environment in which to live and thrive?

    ReplyDelete