Montclair Township Planning Director Janice Talley appeared before the township council on July 12 and talked about a redevelopment plan for the Montclair Center Gateway area; a block defined as the area between Orange Road and Valley Road from Bloomfield Avenue to the Orange Road parking garage. The 2.5-acre area has officially been made an “Area In Need Of Redevelopment” due to the vacancy of the massive DCH automobile dealership building on the corner of Valley Road and Bloomfield Avenue and its former storage lots. But even before this project actually begins, some Montclair residents have expressed concern about the possibility of any of the builders of the problematic Siena condominium apartment building being involved in this new project.
Talley emphasized that she was not officially introducing the redevelopment plan, only initiating a discussion of the draft of the plan. The proposal she spelled out on July 12 was the result of six months of work and discussions with property owners in the designated block and several community meetings.
“It’s looking for mixed-use development,” Talley said. “We’d permit residential development and first-floor retail. We encourage a hotel within the redevelopment area. By encourage, I mean we have incentives built into the plan to encourage the ultimate redeveloper to put a hotel at this location.” Such incentives, Talley said, would include allowing an additional two stories in the height of the building.
Other components of the plan include 10 percent of the proposed area – about 38,000 square feet – as designated for office use, a mix of housing to cater to diverse populations including senior citizens and low-to-moderate-income families, and restaurants. Additionally, Talley stressed the need to set the buildings back by two feet to create more sidewalk space, plant trees along the sidewalks, vary the building heights to offset them from each other, and include a pedestrian plaza at the corner of Orange Road and Bloomfield Avenue.
Open space was a problem to include, Talley said. “The site is oddly configured, it’s oddly shaped, it’s narrow, and it’s built up. So we looked for open space where we can get it.”
Mayor Jerry Fried has been excited about the project going forward. A proponent of the New Urbanist movement, which seeks to develop walkable and transit-friendly towns and neighborhoods, he envisions the project as a possible textbook example of sustainable development. In a television interview this past February, he explained that DCH, the largest landowner in the zone, had a concept to turn the property into the premier environmentally friendly “green” development on the East Coast.
“The idea is that they would provide this green infrastructure for the separate developments that are a part of it,” Fried said. “We’re talking about solar panels on everything, geothermal heating and cooling . . . generating electricity from waste. They’re talking about a compressed natural gas-powered shuttle bus to connect it with train stations and other locations in Montclair… just a whole variety of different green features that really fits in with what Montclair’s values are.” The township would ultimately select the developer.
But a few Montclair residents who are familiar with redevelopment in the township are skeptical, specifically regarding the role of Pinnacle Companies (a developer of the Siena condominium), which has an agreement with DCH, and has represented them in discussions with Talley’s office in relation to the project.
Given the ongoing concerns with the construction and workmanship at the Siena, condo owner Vincent Forbes wrote a letter to Councilors Roger Terry (At-Large) and Nick Lewis (Third Ward) expressing fears of a repeat of the Siena experience.
“I hope that any plans to award any kind of contracts or allow Pinnacle and/or Kohl (or any of their subsidiaries or development ventures) to build another structure in the heart of Montclair will be taken with consideration of all of the construction issues at The Siena,” Forbes wrote. “The last thing that Montclair needs is yet another blight in its core business district, one that will end up draining more resources from Montclair Township, rather than adding to its financial health and economic vibrancy.”
Pinnacle CEO Brian Stolar, expressing his commitment in correcting the Siena’s defects, responded that none of the developers which Pinnacle worked with on the Siena are involved in the DCH project. Talley has also said that Pinnacle has not actually been designated by the township as a redeveloper for the DCH site.
The current redevelopment plan, Talley stresses, is just a beginning of the process. All of the elements of this plan, prepared by the Hoboken planning firm Philips, Preiss, Grygiel LLC, are preliminary. A redevelopment subcommittee, which includes members of both the township council and the planning board, has also been overseeing this process, and the plan requires the approval of both of council and the planning board.
Talley’s presentation provoked a measured reaction from Montclair Housing Commission chair Wendy McNeil, who made a presentation for her own group at the July 12 council meeting. “[I] found it very interesting that no one from the housing commission is on the subcommittee,” she told the council. “We have some excellent people, [who are] resources on how to maintain Montclair as a diverse community.” McNeil cited attorney Bob Goodsall and National Housing Institute Executive Director Harold Simon among her fellow housing commissioners as examples.
Pinnacle’s role, though, remains the biggest bone of contention going forward, and Mayor Fried spoke to the issue. “I am certain that there are residents of the Siena who are concerned about issues at their building that are the subject of litigation,” he told Baristanet. “The Township Council will take into consideration all Township concerns and will engage the public in numerous discussions as we continue to move forward on this important project.”
After getting input from the council, Talley will present the redevelopment plan to the planning board on August 8, followed by a formal presentation to the council at its August 16 meeting and a public hearing at the council meeting set for September 20.
In other words, Pinnacle is going to get the go ahead as a reward for the outstanding job they did on the Siena.
Area In Need Of Redevelopment = Area in need of taxpayer money.
I read most of the Gateway Redevelopment Plan and I have a number of questions about topics not in my opinion adequately addressed.
1. I know the definition of the word “gateway,” but from where do we expect the crowds to arrive? Shouldn’t there be a demographic study to assess what is possible? And at least compare these ideas to other comparable projects?
I think a successful project will be one that firsts attracts people from our town and in turn entices others to visit, eat and shop. Consequently, I think that the most productive first step we could take would be to create some intra-Montclair transportation option.
2. Per the report, what are the definitions of “transit ready” and “transit oriented?” Given today’s circumstances I don’t imagine that we are either. Is there any way one of our local town neighbors could get to Montclair without driving? In the same vein, “what transit assets” are we talking about?
3. Are there “positive fiscal impacts” other than increased property taxes?
4. One topic not mentioned in the document is crime. Note the problems in the Lackawanna Plaza area. Wouldn’t it be prudent to fix those problems to demonstrate the ability to tackle the larger project?
5. How does our “fragmented jumble of aging single use commercial properties” differ from those in the Village or SoHo?
I hope these issues can be addresses before we start spending money.
Pay first; talk later.
Why no description of what “incentives” the township is offering? How much will this cost the taxpayer? The reporter needs to do more homework on an incomplete report.
I think a trolley/light rail down the middle of Bloomfield Ave from the Bay Street station would add just the right level of hilarity to our current traffic situation.
ROC, as you know, many many towns offer incentives to builders. Often these incentives yield long term gains to the “taxpayer”. New York City has had a few, such as 421b and J51- and they have been very lucrative to the coffers over the long term.
The Redevelopment plan is on the Township website.
People SHOULD read it!
It’s got environmental, sustainable, pedestrian friendly, alternate energy, alternate transportation, green everything.
There is a BIG push to get the plan done ASAP.
“Often these incentives yield long term gains to the “taxpayer” and often they are “shangri-la” too. The only way to evaluate them is to know the terms.
“It’s got environmental, sustainable, pedestrian friendly, alternate energy, alternate transportation, green everything.”
Translation:
“It’s got Tax$, Tax$$, Tax$, Tax$$$$$, Tax$$, Tax$$$$$$$$.”
Why don’t they work with Montclair State and put a dorm there. Imagine: 400 students living in downtown Montclair…
I’m sure businesses would love it…
Imagine: red and white MSU shuttle buses cruising all through town.
And don’t forget all the tax revenue.
Huh? Someone had this idea?
Oh, well, tear it down and build a nail salon!
There are some details at the Montclair Times:
“We have incentives built into the plan to encourage the opening redeveloper to put a hotel at this location,” Talley said. “And these incentives include an additional two stories in the height of the building. Throughout the redevelopment area the maximum height is six stories. That’s consistent with what’s permitted in the township C-1 zone. But we’ve a lot of other more flexible development regulations to really encourage redevelopment in this area.”
http://www.northjersey.com/news/125468288_Montclair__Gateway__plan_calls_for_hotel__special_setbacks_.html
Get ready for 8 stories and other “more flexible development regulations”.
ROC
You might like:
non-environmental, non-sustainable, non-pedestrian friendly, non-alternate energy, non-alternate transportation, non-green everything, as do the fossilized congressmen who might share your views, but there’s a great model that should float your boat, right near by -
a day trip to WIllowbrook Mall might satisfy your soul.
What is happening with the former DeCozen dealership in Montclair, on Blmfd. Ave? I have 1 of my cars serviced at their dealership, in Verona, and I asked about the former locaton, and nobody seemed to know a thing about it. That too is a big parcel of land, with a fence around it.
Clearly this will be the biggest redevelopment project in Montclair for the foreseeable future and will dwarf Sienna/Church St in every aspect. I have read the plan and have some concerns.
Financially, the impact is undocumented and there is not a pro forma in the plan. I have read here that the OBAC and Capital Committees will not likely figure into this plan review. I must assume the Township will hire outside help to evaluate this. I am not a fan of PILOTs for small towns unless they are from non-profits for specific services.
I also do not see mention or allowances for the contaminated parcel picture above (corner of Orange & Bloomfield). I am not sure a Plan should be approved until we have a full assessment and remediation plan as an appendix.
I am also concerned that the Siena & Church St development projects have not panned out the way I had hoped. This is partly due to the subsequent and significant amendments to the original. I also found the same to be true of the designs originally approved. I believe a stronger approval process is required and should include a super majority bar for the Council to approve future amendments.
Lastly, per Mr Africk’s above comment, I do not see the urgency for a project of this scale. We should take all the time required and make sure we have proper inputs and vetted all the details.
Bloomfield gave away the store with a development project by giving a 30 year tax abatement for ‘luxury’ apartments.
The rush is due to the expiring of our green-caped crusader’s term of office.
Frank,
Your points are excellent! Maybe YOU can become part of the “subcommittee?”
There is a Consultant working on the project. Unlike the proposal to develop MSU Student Housing on the site, there is no proforma or any other type of financial analysis being done.
The MUS project was ALL ABOUT returns to the Town and many people supporting the current plan were apoplectic about the “small” financial returns to the Town for student housing, assuming one thinks of $1MM plus per year, $3MM in related financial benefit, no families with kids to send to the school, etc., etc. to be “small.”
But I digress! This project has a lot to do with “values” and I’m saying this with all due respect, but not necessarily totally agreeing with the approach.
Thus the project will demonstrate sustainability, alternate energy generation, solar, green roofs, open space, and so on. It will also demonstrate senior housing and affordable housing and public spaces.
It also includes some folks long term desire for a hotel.
In short, this document is a “this is what WE want.”
As to the contaminated area, that has been “carved out” so it won’t need to be immediately addressed.
Someone also asked about DeCozen.
I have long advocated (before I was fired from the planning board) that the project encompass the entire area, rather than piecemeal. The bone I got was that we are calling this “phase 1.” I find it difficult to appreciate one side of a street being modernized while the other side is in disrepair.
ROC,
You are soooooo funny!
” It will also demonstrate … affordable housing…”
The report specifically states affordable housing is not in the plan.
There is a 10% Affordable Housing Component. E.g. if there are 200 market rate apartments, there have to be 20 affordable ones.
“In short, this document is a “this is what WE want.””
Not that it’s worth a hill of beans, this isn’t what WE want; it’s what YOU want.
I don’t want to see an eight story building on that space. I don’t want another PILOT arrangement. I don’t need a hotel on the site (how many people really want to stay in a hotel in Montclair?)
But YOU will make the decisions YOU want no matter what WE say.
I stand corrected Cary,
I read this in the appendix “• The Plan Area does not include any existing low and moderate income housing units.”
I guess that means, currently…
Well said Howard!
…..and now folks, you can all see when all is said & done, the cement & bricks are dry and the majority are discusted with the outcome of all this…the why of it…. nothing has begun and everyone is allready got their undies in knots, and the usual finger pointing….Geeezzz
The center of Monclair is an extremely busy area, as a main drag East-West with hoards of bus traffic, big loud trucks and lots of traffic.
You are never going to make it like the centers of Westfield, Millburn, Summit, Maplewood or South Orange. It’s a main Country loud, noisy avenue.
Church Street is the nice but it is very small area.
Mr Africk,
Thank you for the additional information & comments.
You have not allayed my concerns about the brownfield because underground contaminants, especially on a slope, will tend to migrate beyond the property footprint. If you look at the remediation scope and test wells for the Exxon/Mobil Upper Montclair site, the scope is well beyond the property lines of the contamination source. Last February Pinnacle said it was going to meet with the Director of the NJDEP and then have follow-ups. I think the DEP site reports & remediation plans should be part of the Redevelopment Plan.
The MSU income was based on a non-profit occupying the site with college students who would not use the school system. As this is 100% for-profit development, I would think $1MM is rather small. The average Montclair tax bill is about $15k. I’ll guess these condos/apartments will be assessed in the 250k-350k, maybe more. You can see where my math is taking me.
I’m not trying to be negative. It is just this is the biggest development opportunity over the next 20 years and our greatest chance to impact our ratables in a significant way. Remember, the $1MM South Park improvements were predicated on increased property assessments. If Gateway goes under PILOT, then how does it affect the South Park St payback?
There never was a South Park “payback” in any real sense.
Oh, who needs ratables when you can have an 8 story LEED certified hotel/retail/senior housing complex!
Whenever I book a hotel, I always opt for one that is LEED certified with proximity to seniors if that option is available.
I’m all for more rateables. But I have absolutely no confidence that the boobs running this town can conjure up successful business models. A hotel? Really? Rather than hand out “incentives” let’s let the market and the business community determine how best to build successful businesses in Montclair.
Gator, I first check the thread count. But after that, I always look for something in a suburb, at least a half mile walk up a hill from a train station if there is no taxi stand out front. Being in a building with senior housing and being in a LEED structure with a green roof is just icing on the cake.
It’s about demonstrating the values of a progressive society. That’s a bold move. I think they’re going into the Buckminster Fuller playbook on this one.
Geo dome pods as affordable housing.
Funny, nigator.
I’m a rookie senior myself and try to avoid the pros as much as possible.
“Whenever I book a hotel, I always opt for one that is LEED certified with proximity to seniors if that option is available.”
I don’t know if Pal’s Cabin is LEED certified, but you will be close to lots of seniors.
And I am occasionally one of them.
I guess I need to be less subtle …..
I am not defending this plan …. I am filling in the details as I understand them.
The MSU project created an entity that paid taxes, unlike a non-profit. The MSU project would have positively impacted the business district. Gateway is a “values” project.
Frank is right about the contamination and I will seek to clarify things.
Would someone please, please change the “featured comment”? It’s past time to have the current one taken out back and shot.
I think we should put up cranky’s comment about having voted for Nixon.
LEED type construction is the new and intelligent standard, JG. But intelligence is a trait found in elitists, so that’s bad for America.
Europe is already on board, big time, ( cloudy Germany has more green roofs and renewables than bright and sunny gun-choked Phoenix) .
We’ll get there too, as a proud nation, JG, despite the sprawl that has uglified our beautiful country.
(The opposing view will now be offered by a lobbyist for the American Tar and Asphalt Pavers Association, who will inform you that I should be condemned for attempting to kill off all those decent American jobs in the black and sticky pavement sector of our robust economy.)
PS, JG, let’s not bring up Nixon. My great uncle Spiro T. Agnew ( my avatar ! ) of blessed memory was his loyal vice president,that is, until he was canned.
Cranky could apply to many of us, ‘gurl.
There once was a poster named cranky
Whom Jerseygurl wanted to spanky
She might have gone dunnit
‘Cept he’d've had too much fun widdit
So instead she just smoked some sweet danky
(Sorry, that was awful, but I’m in a hurry.)
I wonder whether Montclair has actually found a hotelier who would be interested in that location. I have read that Bloomfield was anxious to put a hotel downtown, but that none was interested.
It’s called the Gateway not Getaway for a cranky, spanky, danky at Motel 6.
What if they did put up a 5-star hotel ? Whom would come to it?
Perhaps parents of college students or maybe a few business-people staying in the area for a short time. Truthfully that is all I could think of.
Many vacant rooms I forsee. It has to make money, or it will close down and be yet another “white Elephant” with “FOR RENT” banners hanging on it.
Perhaps many will come from other towns in Jersey, to stay over night to visit the Pathmark on the avenue at dawn !!
I cannot think of any town’s center in Essex County, with a hotel. I wonder why !!?
Don’t forget about the proximity to Whole Foods, and think of the crowds it will draw for Pre-K graduation. If we build it they WILL come!
It’s not about the hotel and I’m quite sure it never has been. It just one of many nice, shiny, silver balls up in the air. Unfortunately, these are the leads that seem to dominate the conversation.
It is simply about 360,000 s/f of residential space & a 500 space parking deck. I think this is what should e the crux of the conversation. Those are the 2 number to remember as this is discussed over the Fall & Winter.
IMO,I think a over-bearing structure like that is not the right land use in a town’s centre. Westfield does have a “Motor-Court” (Motel) but it is a mere 2 (possibly 3) stories high. Other than that. I cannot think of such a hotel in of the following centers of town: Maplewood, South Orange, West Orange. Orange, the 3 Caldwells, Verona, Bloomfield or Nutley.
YES, there are some huge apartments, but, again, they are not in the center of town. Montclair has the Sienna, and now people want another ? One is not enough?
What would I like to see there? Perhaps a Walgreens would serve the area well, with off street parking.
If we can have a wish list of what could be there, how about a Wegman’s? (Although that might put the Whole Foods out of business.)
When I travel, I insist on staying at hotels that are contiguous to low income housing. Are you kidding me?
Pinnacle, Kohl, Herod Development, Brian Stoler (quoted in article) should simply not be permitted to undertake ANY future development in Montclair or anywhere in New Jersey until they fix the issues with the Siena and do what is right by the many Montclair citizens who now call it home.
It would be an outrage if our town leadership allowed them to even establish an ice cream truck in town until this is done and verified, no matter take on another development.
Who is this town run for – its citizens or a few businesses out to make a quick & dirty buck?
FYI: The Governor’s proposal for affordable housing calls for a 10 percent affordable housing unit requirement in development projects greater than 10 units (i.e. 2 affordable units for a 20 unit development), and requires a payment to a municipal affordable housing trust fund for projects between 2 and 10 units. The Governor recommends provisions to give priority housing trust funding for projects that provide special needs housing.
http://www.state.nj.us/governor/news/news/552010/approved/20100513b.html
In a minor coincidence related to the contamination issue, the Valley Rd entrance in the Upper Montclair Plaza was closed yesterday afternoon so that a crew could check the many environmental monitors for Starbucks and adjacent properties. Starbucks sits on a former Exxon station.
I think we should put up cranky’s comment about having voted for Nixon.
http://birthdaygiftsforher.info
I appreciate the planning departments due diligence to promote a well-positioned urban planning framework that would realize the economic, environmental and social benefits of Smart Growth redevelopment.
But I don’t really see where Montclair has already made incremental progress towards creating a compact, connected and mixed-use overall plan, and I feel that the new buildings projects like the Siena and the Washington Street School have only achieved undesirable results. Other projects in town like Christopher Court for example, have only harmed Montclair’s valuable built landscape. There is no excuse to ever allow a nightmare like that to re occur.
My strong feeling is that we can’t afford to move forward with the same political decision makers, planning boards, commissions, developers and construction firms that resulted in projects like the Siena, Christopher Court the Washington Street School. This nightmare cannot continue.
Where I feel that this type of evaluation is standard necessary procedure in town planning, and most of the points expressed in the plan are valid criteria, I somehow always maintain that Montclair is SOMEPLACE, not just ANYPLACE.
The report mentions that the historic character of the rest of Montclair Center is not present in the Gateway Area. There were historic buildings in this area buy they were lost to poor planning. Lets not allow the same individuals who have made irreversible mistakes to continue to make these extremely important decisions. They have proven to be under qualified or acting upon their own personal interests. I am grateful, however, for projects that re vitalized the old Kimberley Building (Katherine Gibbs) , the Wellmont Theater .and some of the new individual instances like the Elevation Burger Building.
This Gateway Project Presentation seems like a good beginning to me but it needs to evolve. It already seems like its reached a point of expired functional desirability, and its too “Downtown NJ Cookiecutter “ to just make the concepts expressed applicable for Montclair.
Here’s some of my ideas.
Montclair is a desirable historically interesting “destination” because of its stunning array of great HOUSES, built a century ago by some of the wealthiest American business people. Montclair is special for the gorgeous houses. As more time passes, it’s the houses, landscape, NYC views and rich cultural contributions and history of the community that will attract people and business and this is what will put Montclair on the international map as a destination. Instead of planning for a hotel…create hospitality structures with the HOUSES…bed and breakfasts….event venues….pop up galleries. Make the great houses and streets adjacent to the center thrive and flourish!
A big master development wouldn’t work because it would just allow for the creation of a HUGE new Siena result. TOTALLY UNDESIRABLE.
Its unfortunate that the re development plan didn’t work out with MSU…I would lOVE to see some of their beautiful new vernacular buildings in Montclair Center as well as the opportunity to re develop to create an “INTELLEGENT VILLAGE” concept.
I am very grateful for commissioner Rubaky’s insights and I would absolutely heed his valuable words in moving forward. I am also more intrigued by some of Mayor Fried’s green urban planning ideas that are more suitable for Montclair than just copying and pasting the Siena all over the center.
Because of the characteristics of the historic center landscape, I would just fill in the blanks and missing teeth in Montclair Center with good architecture that would enhance Montclair’s identity as a destination. New traditional vernacular buildings like at MSU….Richard Meier’s (a local award willing architect) Glass Boxes… http://youtu.be/B-4Tl_wxZ9k
Intelligent buildings like the New Cooper Union Building http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2009/06/05/arts/20090605-COOP_index.html
I would also LOVE to see some Frank Gehry buildings in town.
(therefore I don’t agree with the guidelines regarding Spandrel glass and glazed façade appearances)
I would re think the plaza. It would be too small and perhaps more intelligent if the plaza would span over Bloomfield Avenue to create a bridge element that would re tie Montclair Center back together. More bridge structure buildings would be great along Bloomfield to retie the center back together…like the Ponte Vecchio or at Battery Park City.
There are two intersecting brooks under the Gateway Area that should not be ignored. Perhaps they could be brought to light and culminate in a pond feature.
I think those buildings you link to (and Gehry’s work) are all horrendous.
Gehry! Good God it’s a Simpson’s episode.
…a chaque un son gout cher ROC… Do you prefer having the Siena copied and pasted all over Montclair Center? I don’t… and I don’t think anyone does…but that’s just what we’re in for. I would also have preferred if they would have left the original buildings in place, like the grand old Victorian hotel that was on the gateway site. (That was gone long before we were born) The old cavity wall fake brick constructions are already obsolete and technology has shifted to steel and concrete AutoCAD inspired designs with technological glass skins. This type of technology is sustainable. Buildings had to evolve. I would be surprised to see the Siena still standing in 20 years.
http://www.saynotopinnaclebuildinginmontclair.com/