Spot Re-zoning for Atlantic Healthcare Remarkably Now Needs Parking Variance

scottgreenstone said:

What?

I think you mean WTF?

Has a lease.been signed to make the MD office a nonconforming preexisting usage?

michaelgoldberg said:

@transparent - At Monday's BOT Meeting, they are repealing the "spot-zoning" Ordinance that was just adopted at the last meeting

Maybe Village Counsel decided to acknowledge that the Village rode roughshod over NJ statutes by:

- Failing to publish the actual substance of the ordinance in advance of the second reading
- Failing to seek Planning Board review
- Failing to notice property owners within 200'
- Failing to notify the County and adjacent towns
- Failing to use a shred of common sense (not really required by law)

Ler's see if the acting Village Clerk uses the News Record next time, instead of the more costly and less local Star Ledger for the new public notice.

Would love to know who's blaming who for this cluster f**k.

This is really something.

Generally, Torpey asks the Village attorney to explain what the ordinance does and why it's necessary. Let's see if he does so this time.

michaelgoldberg said:

@transparent - At Monday's BOT Meeting, they are repealing the "spot-zoning" Ordinance that was just adopted at the last meeting:

http://southorange.no-ip.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=126620&dbid=0

Fascinating.
(and once again the attachment is not included)

You mean 13-20 which states that Trustee Levison voted for it and was also absent while there is nothing recorded for Trustee Rosner. Wonder if this work product will be reviewed and considered by the BOT if acting clerk Smith applies to become the Clerk.

How embarrassing.

ctrzaska said:

How embarrassing.

I didn't even mention that announcements 1 and 5 are the same on the agenda. I guess proof reading is a lost art.

What's the over-under on whether Torpey will buck up and explain this FUBAR situation, or whether he'll cowardly ask Village Counsel to explain it for him.

The real shame of this do-over is that Atlantic Health's lobby machine now will have to trot out all those employees, doc's, and patients to whine about how there are no MD's in South Orange. Wasn't it puzzling how, despite the absence of any public disclosure about the substance of this ordinance, Atlantic Health knew to recruit so many "proponents," like the elderly Maplewood resident who persuasively noted she'd like to be vaccinated in the same town that she brings her dog for vaccinations.

It was especially bizarre listening to Davis-Ford invoke Obamacare as a rationale for converting downtown retail spaces into offices -- only topped by her pointing to women serving in public office as evidence that the Village should rezone its downtown. For a moment, it felt like she was channeling Peter Sells in "Being There".

Amateur hour.

Please note that the ordinance attachment can be found at:
http://southorange.no-ip.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=126643&dbid=0

What does southorange.-no-ip.org mean?

The page cannot be displayed
There are too many people accessing the Web site at this time.

Please try the following:

Click the Refresh button, or try again later.
Open the southorange.no-ip.org home page, and then look for links to the information you want.

HTTP 403.9 - Access Forbidden: Too many users are connected
Internet Information Services

Technical Information (for support personnel)

Background:
This error can occur if the Web server is busy and cannot process your request due to heavy traffic.

More information:
Microsoft Support

Stop complaining LL_!
Same error for me.

I get the sense that only a small handful of users can access Laserfiche (the document repository) simultaneously.

I briefly looked at the link and it appears that the initial "spot zoning" to allow medical offices is still included. So, this appears to be a major "do-over", likely for one or more of the reasons outlined by Transparent above.

Trans_Parent said:

- Failing to publish the actual substance of the ordinance in advance of the second reading
- Failing to seek Planning Board review
- Failing to notice property owners within 200'
- Failing to notify the County and adjacent towns
- Failing to use a shred of common sense (not really required by law)

I wonder what "excuse" will be given and who (if anyone) will take responsibility

I like that it refers to redevelopment of the Shop-Rite site and is dated November 2013.

OMG

On Page 6, under "Principal Permitted Uses":

"- Offices, including professional offices above the first floor. Sites/buildings that do not front on South Orange Avenue may have offices on the first floor."

This would appear to resolve the issue. In fact there are plenty of medical offices on the first floor of other buildings in the CBD that do not front on SOA. I would suggest that The Avenue was actually the exception, and was originally "spot-zoned" differently than other properties that do not front SOA. The Valley and 1st St. area has several examples.

Rob_Sandow said:

On Page 6, under "Principal Permitted Uses":

"- Offices, including professional offices above the first floor. Sites/buildings that do not front on South Orange Avenue may have offices on the first floor."

This would appear to resolve the issue. In fact there are plenty of medical offices on the first floor of other buildings in the CBD that do not front on SOA. I would suggest that The Avenue was actually the exception, and was originally "spot-zoned" differently than other properties that do not front SOA. The Valley and 1st St. area has several examples.

Rob,

That is incorrect. You would have to read the prior version of the document, but I believe it used to say "Permitted uses - - Offices, including professional offices above the first floor. "

There are currently no medical offices on the first floor in the "CBD". Valley is not considered part of the "CBD"

And he hands it to Rother to explain. Wimp.

Rother's response was that there was a "defect" in the publication of ordianance. He didn't state what defect was. If passed on First Reading, which it just was, it will be published with a summary of the changes.

Just as interesting was that Rother said after it was passed on First Reading, the Planning Board would have 45 days to comment on the amended CBD Redeveloment Plan.

It made me sad
That our acting village Clerk hadn't taken the time to learn how to pronounce the name of one of thw larger religious institutions in our town

michaelgoldberg said:

Rob,

That is incorrect. You would have to read the prior version of the document, but I believe it used to say "Permitted uses - - Offices, including professional offices above the first floor. "

There are currently no medical offices on the first floor in the "CBD". Valley is not considered part of the "CBD"

You're right Michael. I forgot that the CBD is more gerrymandered than a North Carolina Congressional District.

Why, for example, are all of the businesses on the west side of Village Plaza out, but those on the east side are in? Why are 4 restaurant properties in the heart of downtown with liquor licenses out, but a funeral home most of the way up the hill past the Rite Aid and definitely not in what I would consider the CDB, is in? Why would First St between Valley and Academy be out, but several vacant lots farther south on Valley are in?

Perhaps we should start by examining the borders of the CBD so that they make sense and zoning can then be applied consistently throughout the downtown.

http://southorange.org/development/SmartGrowthPlan6-12/ZoningandRedevelopmentDistricts.pdf

Rob_Sandow said:

I forgot that the CBD is more gerrymandered than a North Carolina Congressional District.

You're right about the boundaries of the redevelopment zone enacted by Calabrese & Company way back when. It was the product of urban planning with a heavy dose of local politics. Probably the best illustration of that was the controversially negotiated omission of a retail property on West SOA, steps from the train station, surrounded by properties within the zone.

However, a better definition of the Village's CBD probably is in the more recent Downtwon Vision Plan's, http://southorange.org/vision/, Village Core.

Despite your desire, Rob, as someone who sought public office, to rezone downtown retail spaces to now house second-floor, commercial uses -- a truly bad, regressive idea -- there currently are no doctors' (or engineers', consultants', architects', wholesalers', distributors', or other non-retail) offices in retail storefronts -- in the Village's true CBD. That said, on the edge of the CBD, you can see the boarded "storefront" of a commercial use in a retail space next to Lee's Cleaners on West SOA, which apparently is what you'd now like to see on all of the streets adjacent to SOA.

Trans Parent, please don't tell me what I'd like to see. Actually, I would like to see commercial/retail properties occupied. In the case of properties with frontage on SOA, I think they should all be retail, but to zone a building a few hundred feet up Vose for one purpose and a different building a few hundred feet up Valley differently just doesn't make sense. I think the current proposal to allow first floor professional offices in buildings that do not have frontage on SOA does make sense, as long as they are the type of office that could reasonably be expected to generate foot traffic during regular business hours.

Personally I wish we had lots of true retail stores that sell actual things. But the realities of Amazon.com, easily accessible shopping malls, and highways like Rt 22 and Rt 10, make it difficult to attract that kind of retail. The days of the downtown hardware store are over. Which is why downtown is mostly pizza places, banks, Chinese food, dry cleaners, hair/nail salons, etc. Those are the types of businesses that can thrive in the modern era in a place like SO. I just don't think that a doctor's office is particularly less preferable than any of those things, and it's certainly more preferable than an empty store front, especially in a space that does not have frontage on SOA.

Here is a perfect example of why it makes sense to have occupied professional offices that generate foot traffic in spaces just off of SOA. Tonight, I had an appointment with South Orange Chiropractic, a first floor professional office located on First St near Valley. Since I was downtown anyway, I also went to Supercuts and got a haircut, spending $14 plus tip. After that, I spent $97 at Ashley for some groceries, and then $25 at the liquor store next to Papillon. Then I met my wife for dinner at Toro Loco and spent about $100. Total spending tonight in downtown SO, not including the Chiropractor, about $235. None of that would have happened if I did not need to be downtown anyway for the Chiropractic appointment. I probably would have gone to Essex Green for the groceries and liquor store, and we would have had dinner at home.

Why would you travel to Essex Green for groceries and liquor, when South Orange has two supermarkets, and 3-4 liquor stores. You either shop local to support local businesses or you don't.

Probably 90% of local physicians are close to St. Barnabas and other in-region hospitals, and unlike supermarkets and liquor stores, patients chose them based on referrals, recommendations, and research -- not based on their proximity to Starbucks or Toro Loco.

Because, Trans Parent, the Shop Rite and Total Wine at Essex Green are significantly less expensive than the stores we have in downtown South Orange. So if I want the convenience of a local shopping trip combined with another reason to be downtown, I will do that.

I'm not discussing your other issue about proximity of physicians to hospitals. That was not my point.

I'm going to my GP in Summit since that's where he is, then often doing other errands while there. Should he open an office in SO, then that's where I'd go over Summit and run some additional errands. I didn't pick him for his location, but would surely follow him closer to home. Hardly a stretch to think that many would do the same, particularly those of us who live in surrounding towns upon whom local businesses greatly depend.

I can't believe anyone can spend $100 on dinner for 2 at Toro Loco.

Trans_Parent said:

Why would you travel to Essex Green for groceries and liquor, when South Orange has two supermarkets, and 3-4 liquor stores. You either shop local to support local businesses or you don't.

Probably 90% of local physicians are close to St. Barnabas and other in-region hospitals, and unlike supermarkets and liquor stores, patients chose them based on referrals, recommendations, and research -- not based on their proximity to Starbucks or Toro Loco.

Can't believe you are saying this to a guy that just spent more than $200 in town on an average tuesday night. Unless you are a very wealthy person, one doesn't buy paper towels or juice boxes at Ashley on a regular basis.

Your second point is the reason why Rob is right. People will come to downtown so that they can go to their doctor, which leads to shopping at starbuck or toro. We need things that bring people to downtown other than good will to shop locally. That will only go so far.

100% agree with Rob, if it's on the side street downtown, it's ludicrous to not allow these professional uses that will generate traffic to downtown.