Demolishing Homes In Maplewood

Maybe the contractor is dyslexic?

joan_crystal said:

 The town is too reliant on using the Internet as their often sole means of communicating with residents.  We still have a significant portion of the town's residents who lack Internet access. We need a more inclusive way of sharing information.

what constitutes a significant portion? What's the percentage of residents without either broadband or a smartphone?

Personally, I think the township should share information in as many different media as possible, including the local newspaper. But frankly there are some people who just don't pay attention to what's going on in the township. The mayor could use sky writing, drop leaflets off at every doorstep, and call everyone's phone, and still some people would claim there was no communication.

It may be due to my work in advocating for our older adult population that I have a greater awareness of this need than most. I don't recall the exact percentage of residents known to lack Internet access.  They tend to fall into two major categories: older adults and low income households.  Even those older adults who have Internet access may not be in the habit of using their Internet device or may lack the technical knowledge to access websites or email.  In theory, low income residents could use the public computers at the library but with the main library closed and use of computers at the Hilton Branch reserved for children and teens, access to the few public computers at OEM is limited. In recognition of the number of households in town lacking WiFi access, the town recently extended the range of the WiFi at Hilton Branch so that residents with devices that could access the Internet but no WiFi could access the Library's WiFi from outside the building.

We both agree on the central point which is that the town has to do a better job of establishing and maintaining a variety of means of communication so that they can reach as many people as possible in a timely fashion when important information needs to be made available to everyone.  

Joan, WiFi access and home Internet are different than smart phones.  There are people without home Internet who still have smartphones.  So the significant portion that Ml1 is asking about is even smaller.  This is a code violation issue that is being resolved.  Relatively minor issues occur every day that are not transmitted to residents.  Meeting notices are still published, aren't they?

DanDietrich said:

Joan, WiFi access and home Internet are different than smart phones.  There are people without home Internet who still have smartphones.  So the significant portion that Ml1 is asking about is even smaller.  This is a code violation issue that is being resolved.  Relatively minor issues occur every day that are not transmitted to residents.  Meeting notices are still published, aren't they?

yes. A fair number of less affluent people use their phones for internet access. Nationwide smartphone penetration was 85% as of 2021, and the percentage in Maplewood probably comes pretty close to 100%.

that said, I'm in favor of the township using any and all reasonable methods to reach everyone possible -- print, mail, etc. But in 2023, the internet is almost certainly the best and most efficient way to reach the most residents, even if it's not 100%. 

ml1 said:

yes. A fair number of less affluent people use their phones for internet access. Nationwide smartphone penetration was 85% as of 2021, and the percentage in Maplewood probably comes pretty close to 100%.

that said, I'm in favor of the township using any and all reasonable methods to reach everyone possible -- print, mail, etc. But in 2023, the internet is almost certainly the best and most efficient way to reach the most residents, even if it's not 100%. 

Agreed. 

At some point, efficiency needs to come into play.  Town-wide mailings to the 3% (made-up number) of households without internet access are quite a waste. 

Better to offer subsidized internet access to those without.

I can't really envision how the discussions both on FB and MOL would be communicated other than online during all of the "back and forth" about it that has gone on in the last week or so. But I think I saw something about the stop-work order in today's News Record.

I'm not saying that there isn't room for improvement of communication, but I'm not sure what else should have been done so far with this issue.

sac said:

I can't really envision how the discussions both on FB and MOL would be communicated other than online during all of the "back and forth" about it that has gone on in the last week or so. But I think I saw something about the stop-work order in today's News Record.

I'm not saying that there isn't room for improvement of communication, but I'm not sure what else should have been done so far with this issue.

some people don't pay attention. When the old post office site was developed, there were years of discussions at open meetings, newspaper articles, online discussions, focus groups, advocacy groups with tables in the village. And still some people at the 11th hour were complaining that they hadn't been informed of the project. 

The township can't force people to pay attention. 

No it cannot.  However, that does not free them from the obligation to have information out there in a format or formats that those impacted can access.  It doesn’t have to go to the extreme of the post office or police station discussions but the opportunity to access should be available.  It is not just an issue with technology either. We have a high percentage of residents for whom English is not their primary language spoken in the home.  We have residents with limited eyesight and/or hearing loss.  Others may have cognitive issues that limit their ability to process information in printed form.  True inclusion would require communication options that meet the needs of all.  Reality prevents our reaching everyone but does not exclude trying to be as inclusive as possible.  On a positive note, I jut learned that TC meetings are officially back to zoom with live broadcast on Channel 24 for those who do not have Internet access for whatever reason.

joan_crystal said:

No it cannot.  However, that does not free them from the obligation to have information out there in a format or formats that those impacted can access.  It doesn’t have to go to the extreme of the post office or police station discussions but the opportunity to access should be available.  It is not just an issue with technology either. We have a high percentage of residents for whom English is not their primary language spoken in the home.  We have residents with limited eyesight and/or hearing loss.  Others may have cognitive issues that limit their ability to process information in printed form.  True inclusion would require communication options that meet the needs of all.  Reality prevents our reaching everyone but does not exclude trying to be as inclusive as possible.  On a positive note, I jut learned that TC meetings are officially back to zoom with live broadcast on Channel 24 for those who do not have Internet access for whatever reason.

Thanks for the positive note you provided just now re: meetings back on Zoom. As I requested on the other thread you posted that info, can you please share with us the medium by which this info was shared by the TC member you mentioned on the other thread. Thanks!

wendy said:

Thanks for the positive note you provided just now re: meetings back on Zoom. As I requested on the other thread you posted that info, can you please share with us the medium by which this info was shared by the TC member you mentioned on the other thread. Thanks!

advisory committee meeting 

Thanks Joan. Much appreciated!

wendy said:

Thanks Joan. Much appreciated!

Zoom link for Tuesday's TC meeting is now available on the town website.

joan_crystal said:

No it cannot.  However, that does not free them from the obligation to have information out there in a format or formats that those impacted can access.  It doesn’t have to go to the extreme of the post office or police station discussions but the opportunity to access should be available.  It is not just an issue with technology either. We have a high percentage of residents for whom English is not their primary language spoken in the home.  We have residents with limited eyesight and/or hearing loss.  Others may have cognitive issues that limit their ability to process information in printed form.  True inclusion would require communication options that meet the needs of all.  Reality prevents our reaching everyone but does not exclude trying to be as inclusive as possible.  On a positive note, I jut learned that TC meetings are officially back to zoom with live broadcast on Channel 24 for those who do not have Internet access for whatever reason.

we are in agreement on this. 

ml1 said:

I'm in favor of the township using any and all reasonable methods to reach everyone possible -- print, mail, etc. 

But how does a discussion regarding concerns about a home building project rise to the level of requiring some sort of official written notice to the entire township? 

sac said:

But how does a discussion regarding concerns about a home building project rise to the level of requiring some sort of official written notice to the entire township? 

I think I recall somewhere, reading about something called, thread drift.

Interesting... the master plan, open meeting was this morning, How many on M.O.L., knew about it? 

I did.  I'm sure many others as well.  

I did.

Formerlyjerseyjack said:

Interesting... the master plan, open meeting was this morning, How many on M.O.L., knew about it? 

I'm on the email list and got this, translated into multiple languages:

On Friday, April 14, 2023 at 11:02:53 AM EDT, Township of Maplewood, New Jersey wrote:

Formerlyjerseyjack said:

Interesting... the master plan, open meeting was this morning, How many on M.O.L., knew about it? 

There was a thread on MOL

Now, I done gone and embarrassed myself.

Well, Gleasons is demolished.  I guess that means that the PILOT was approved over objections.  

Vic Deluca, tell me it aint so.  You gave your word.

mrmaplewood said:

Well, Gleasons is demolished.  I guess that means that the PILOT was approved over objections.  

Vic Deluca, tell me it aint so.  You gave your word.

https://www.tapinto.net/towns/soma/sections/government/articles/maplewood-reaches-tax-deal-for-new-residential-building-at-site-of-former-gleason-cleaners

The sketch of the proposed new building takes a lot of liberties with the area around it. 

• Where the river actually is, it's drawn to look like grassy greenspace with trees. 
• Where the YMCA parking lot is across the street, it is also made to look like grassy greenspace, with a grassy berm (IRL there is no berm for much of that sidewalk). 

In reality, it will look like a totally paved over area. It's like they put it through a 'face-tune' filter for outdoor areas that adds grassy highlights and tree contouring.

I truly hate it when they do that.  No power lines, either.  Somewhere there is going to be a big pile of transformers.  The renderings should be accurate where possible, but they never are.  I'm for development, but it's easier to buy into when you don't feel like you are at a car dealership getting slimed.

You should see how many liberties Hong Kong developers take with property proposals. All nearby structures are rendered invisible.  If the neighboring building is 20 feet away, it's described as "nearby buildings at a comfortable distance."  One rendering included a non-existent golf course!  I think the govt cracked down a bit after that, but it's still fine to show proposals isolated from most of the nearby structures and roads.

About The Gleason, do the developers know it's in a flood zone?  Will emergency rafts be stowed somewhere in the structure?

Of course they know the situation.

dave said:

You should see how many liberties Hong Kong developers take with property proposals. All nearby structures are rendered invisible.  If the neighboring building is 20 feet away, it's described as "nearby buildings at a comfortable distance."  One rendering included a non-existent golf course!  I think the govt cracked down a bit after that, but it's still fine to show proposals isolated from most of the nearby structures and roads.

About The Gleason, do the developers know it's in a flood zone?  Will emergency rafts be stowed somewhere in the structure?

They have been made well aware of the site being in a flood plain.  The developer is a Maplewood resident who lives very close to the Gleason property.

I just scanned the Tapinto article and I am really confused by the numbers.  

It is said that the PILOT is a financial incentive to the developers (read a tax reduction) for the 46 units.  It says that it is projected to produce $7 million for the town and county.  (County gets 5%.)  But it is also stated that conventional taxes would have been only $3.9 million.  That's NOT a tax incentive!  I'm not a CPA, but something is smelling very wrong with the $3.9 million figure.

And working the figures, the annual per unit taxes over the 30 years is $5072 with the PILOT, but would have been only $2826 without the PILOT.  Something is wrong here.  Maybe Tapinto got their figures reversed.

I know we are dealing with new apartment units here, but I think even $5072 tax per year is sounding enticing to me as a tenet.  $2826 sounds insanely low.  By any chance is $2826 the price of the PILOT that has been approved?