A Vacant Lot Grows in SO
Because if it were residential and commercial then there's be no cars, right?
These buildings have been the definition of blight forever. I applaud their demolition and look forward to the eventual use of these lots as a positive benefit to the Village. I personally know Mr. Ayuso as we both serve on the board of SOPAC, and I have no doubt that what will be there in the future is orders of magnitude better than what was there until yesterday.
Sundays said:
Are there drawings online for what will be built?
As noted by other folks and the article, it'll be a parking lot for the interim. I'd also love to see plans for new structure. But unless it's hiding in plain site, the only elevation I can find is from a 13 year old pamphlet.
http://www.southorange.org/redevelopment/Redev.pdf
Clicking on the Church St redevelopment at the Township's website brings up nothing...
http://www.southorange.org/redevelopment.asp
I also found an article describing the history of that block. My memory fades fast, as one of the buildings, 114 W SOA, was actually a nice 1920s apartment building. The brickwork and roof details were typical of those built by Italian masons in Northern NJ during that era. In terms of historic merit, that would've been a stretch.
http://patch.com/new-jersey/southorange/vacant-buildings-were-once-hub-and-home-of-church-strc22e1d46fc
Rob_Sandow said:
These buildings have been the definition of blight forever. I applaud their demolition and look forward to the eventual use of these lots as a positive benefit to the Village. I personally know Mr. Ayuso as we both serve on the board of SOPAC, and I have no doubt that what will be there in the future is orders of magnitude better than what was there until yesterday.
Back in the early 80's I knew a girl who lived on the top floor of the corner building. Even then that building wasn't in the best condition. They had to turn the oven on with the door slightly ajar because the heat couldn't keep up with the drafts. Sure, they could have replaced the windows, added insulation, and replaced the furnace, but even then there is only so much you can fix before it becomes more cost effective to tear it down and start from scratch. It's been about 30 years, but I seem to recall a layout that would be considered undesirable by renters today. I'm not for tearing down of older homes willy nilly, but realistically from what I remember of the inside the building on the corner was originally built as tenement housing.
ETA: Looking at the pictures the brick building looked a lot nicer and probably could have been turned over. My description above is only in regards to the corner building at W South Orange Ave and Church.
dave said:
Because if it were residential and commercial then there's be no cars, right?
Wouldn't be the same level of guarantee as a parking lot, but go ahead and argue the point if you must.
Looks like a proposed rendering for SO Ave/Church St is online:
http://eeaindustries.com/projects/the-gateway-ii/
A 7-story building? (First two stories are more like 3 stories.) Really? Is it zoned for that? Maybe the Rescue Squad can sell air rights and pay for their building. Might as well. Everything else is dwarfing existing structures.
It does look overpowering. And, I'm not crazy about the look of Gateway I. I guess luxury refers to the expected granite counters and ss appliances. The building certainly is not classy looking on the outside. And ruining the small village feel by building such a tall building in the village, is truly sad.
BTW, didn't Sayed (Said), however his name was spelled, try to build there, and get turned down because he wanted something too tall?????
Not for nothing, but there are more than a few redevelopment experts on this very board. While I cannot speak for them, if anyone is seeking input, you may want to reach out to Author, IndaSechzer, or Fred Profeta. Tell them I gave you their names.
Wow, that's big. Is that what can be built by right? Or would they need variances?
Looks like some people don't want to keep the small town charm of South Orange. There is no way this should even be seriously considered. It's way too tall and would bring way too many people. As it is I think we're already too densely populated at more than 5,000 people per square mile, most suburbs in New Jersey are around 3-4K per square mile.
Why not turn this into a commercial building with a parking lot, or add it to the NJT parking lot adjacent to this space.
Why must every development add more population, why not something else?
Why stop at 7 stories? How about something like Fort Lee's "The Modern?"
http://rentthemodern.com/
When you don't keep up with the news, things have a way of sneaking up on you. I was quite startled this morning when I drove by the corner of SOA and Church, and something was missing. I was all set to make some snarky digs about why Sayid was suddenly bitten by the demolition bug, until I learned he sold the property to The Gateway's developer, Ed Ayuso, last October. This article predicted the buildings would be gone in two weeks, but the fact they're actually being cleared 7 months later is light speed compared to past SO redevelopment estimates.
http://villagegreennj.com/towns/government/developer-buys-long-vacant-church-st-lot-downtown-s-orange/
More interesting is that Jonathan Rose Companies was made responsible for the demo as part of the Third and Valley project. I guess that was a way ensure it would happen. Also of note is the apparent acceptance these building weren't worth saving. The Maplewood PO debate has gone down a variety of roads, not the least of which is the contention any demolition is wrong from a sustainability view, unless the building is beyond repair. I know these structures were shedding parts onto the street, but even that isn't proof that incorporation into the new project was infeasible. In this case, their decrepitude seems to have closed that debate. I tend to view losses of any older structure with some sadness, and tons of extracted materials and a lot energy that went into their production is going to end in a landfill, with the cycle repeated for the new building. But these were some homely, unloved buildings.