Proposed redevelopment in Seton Village
Wow, that rendering of the proposed building in the residential block is scary!
Does anyone know the general condition of the space they're planning on developing? Clean woodlands? Trash/debris? Brownfield?
I live nearby in Seton Village. I would say neglected woodland. Definitely trash/dumped furniture (I am basing this on looking from irvington ave) but not brownfield. It is currently owned by the infamous landlord so beloved in SO.
In 2009's vision plan it was recommended to be green space. I can see the need (i have a young family and would love something like Maplewood's orchard park). But with commercial at the street. I can also see the need to fill in the street and would support something in scale. This looks like something from downtown.
In 2009's vision plan it was recommended to be green space. I can see the need (i have a young family and would love something like Maplewood's orchard park). But with commercial at the street. I can also see the need to fill in the street and would support something in scale. This looks like something from downtown.
I can completely understand not wanting something of this scale right up against the back yards of single-family homes. Looks like an elephant shoehorned into the space for a lamb!
Article from Village Green: http://villagegreennj.com/towns/government/seton-village-residents-organize-protest-density-proposed-development-irvington-ave/
I was so cinfused until I realized the maps were of different aspect. I know the area but could not place the development. Not fun for someone with dyslexia... I think you need to turn the map in your first graphic around. People are used to seeing the map going "up" Irvington Ave.
In the Village Green article, developers project improved property values in the Seton Village area. I imagine not so for homes with a parking lot and four story building in their backyards.
I can't imagine how that could improve property values in the area...
I can see how a successfully redeveloped Irvington Avenue -- that includes housing in some form -- could improve property values in the area.
mbaldwin said:
I can see how a successfully redeveloped Irvington Avenue -- that includes housing in some form -- could improve property values in the area.
Certainly not anyone who's property borders that massive building, though.
I always applaud an optimistic attitude. I recognize and appreciate the enthusiasm and leadership shown by the Seton Village Advisory Committee in generating interest in the area.
There was an email from SVAC to several neighborhood loops as a follow-up to the 3-11-15 Community Forum introducing the project. I can't agree that there was a positive reception to the development proposal for the 4-story, 72-unit apartment building at 270-282 Irvington Avenue. Every aspect came under criticism, not just the height. Gauging the reaction, the proposal created more problems, as well as exacerbating existing ones, along Irvington Avenue and the surrounding neighborhoods.
Four things also became apparent:
1) The close relationship of SVAC chairman Doug Zacker with the developers. Their relationship extends back to their schooldays, which gives the impression of a vested interest (either financial or social) trumping the interests of the neighborhood.
2) The intimation that the project was much farther along in the purchase and approval process. It was implied that it was being fast-tracked due to the pressing need to improve this “blighted” area. In turn, this implied a low likelihood that it would be stopped or modified substantially. This tactic serves to intimidate adjacent property owners into submission, or worse- capitulate and make their properties available to the developers.
3) The inexperience of the developers. They were struggling to answer pointed questions, and only seemed comfortable addressing the aesthetics.
4) High probability of turning into student housing. The small size of the units (65% small studios or one-bedrooms) and the proliferation of more desirable units downtown make it likely that this will appeal to students rather than permanent residents. It may be financially more viable to be built and sold to the University, permanently removing it from the tax rolls.
It is much appreciated that the next steps in the process were outlined, and a two-sided dialogue can begin.
There will be more discussion at the next Seton Village Advisory Committee Meeting,
Wednesday, March 25, 7:30pm – 8:30pm at 76 South Orange Ave/Valley, 3rd floor
There was an email from SVAC to several neighborhood loops as a follow-up to the 3-11-15 Community Forum introducing the project. I can't agree that there was a positive reception to the development proposal for the 4-story, 72-unit apartment building at 270-282 Irvington Avenue. Every aspect came under criticism, not just the height. Gauging the reaction, the proposal created more problems, as well as exacerbating existing ones, along Irvington Avenue and the surrounding neighborhoods.
Four things also became apparent:
1) The close relationship of SVAC chairman Doug Zacker with the developers. Their relationship extends back to their schooldays, which gives the impression of a vested interest (either financial or social) trumping the interests of the neighborhood.
2) The intimation that the project was much farther along in the purchase and approval process. It was implied that it was being fast-tracked due to the pressing need to improve this “blighted” area. In turn, this implied a low likelihood that it would be stopped or modified substantially. This tactic serves to intimidate adjacent property owners into submission, or worse- capitulate and make their properties available to the developers.
3) The inexperience of the developers. They were struggling to answer pointed questions, and only seemed comfortable addressing the aesthetics.
4) High probability of turning into student housing. The small size of the units (65% small studios or one-bedrooms) and the proliferation of more desirable units downtown make it likely that this will appeal to students rather than permanent residents. It may be financially more viable to be built and sold to the University, permanently removing it from the tax rolls.
It is much appreciated that the next steps in the process were outlined, and a two-sided dialogue can begin.
There will be more discussion at the next Seton Village Advisory Committee Meeting,
Wednesday, March 25, 7:30pm – 8:30pm at 76 South Orange Ave/Valley, 3rd floor
mbaldwin said:
I can see how a successfully redeveloped Irvington Avenue -- that includes housing in some form -- could improve property values in the area.
Housing in some form?
mbaldwin said:
I can see how a successfully redeveloped Irvington Avenue -- that includes housing in some form -- could improve property values in the area.
ABSOLUTELYL NOT for any homes bordering the development. The effect of a 4 story building smack up against the back yard of a one or two family house would be devastating to the quality of life and to the value of the properties. Picture looking out your own bedroom window to a 4 story building right up against your back yard fence. And the small section of Irvington Avenue where this building would be has nothing wrong with it. It is houses that now have commercial uses, and a vacant lot.
I think it would be fine to develop the property directly on Irvington Avenue - with something in scale and in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood, but to shoehorn a behemoth of a building in what is a residential area would be criminal.
"I think it would be fine to develop the property directly on Irvington Avenue - with something in scale and in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood, but to shoehorn a behemoth of a building in what is a residential area would be criminal."
We agree! Something in scale and directly on Irvington Ave would be consistent with every Village-commissioned plan for this area, including the 2009 Vision Plan. See in attached: "Townhouses Redevelopment Area"
We agree! Something in scale and directly on Irvington Ave would be consistent with every Village-commissioned plan for this area, including the 2009 Vision Plan. See in attached: "Townhouses Redevelopment Area"
techman said:
mbaldwin said:
I can see how a successfully redeveloped Irvington Avenue -- that includes housing in some form -- could improve property values in the area.
Housing in some form?
Yes, I think additional housing along the corridor would be part of a successful redevelopment. Like sarahzm says, "something in scale and in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood."
Mar 24, 2015 at 1:42pm Edited
avocado said:
1) The close relationship of SVAC chairman Doug Zacker with the developers. Their relationship extends back to their schooldays, which gives the impression of a vested interest (either financial or social) trumping the interests of the neighborhood.
That may be your impression, but is absolutely not true. ETA: Doug Zacker's property backs up directly to the site we're discussing.
I'm not sure how many units the planning document drawing is supposed to be depicting...maybe 6-10 units. That's much more like it.
If the Owner/Developer's plan were to move forward, in addition to looking at a large parking lot and big apartment house, the SFH bordering the property would likely lose the backdrop of many mature trees that are on the property, or have trees at the perimeter of their own property put a risk due to root damage from construction.
I may have missed it in the thread, how many units does current zoning allow for at that location?
If the Owner/Developer's plan were to move forward, in addition to looking at a large parking lot and big apartment house, the SFH bordering the property would likely lose the backdrop of many mature trees that are on the property, or have trees at the perimeter of their own property put a risk due to root damage from construction.
I may have missed it in the thread, how many units does current zoning allow for at that location?
My impression of Doug Zacker is that he cares deeply about the neighborhood and arranged these meetings because he does.
Ultimately, the neighborhood must speak for itself. Doug is facilitating that process.
Ultimately, the neighborhood must speak for itself. Doug is facilitating that process.
avocado said:
There was an email from SVAC to several neighborhood loops as a follow-up to the 3-11-15 Community Forum introducing the project. I can't agree that there was a positive reception to the development proposal for the 4-story, 72-unit apartment building at 270-282 Irvington Avenue. Every aspect came under criticism, not just the height. Gauging the reaction, the proposal created more problems, as well as exacerbating existing ones, along Irvington Avenue and the surrounding neighborhoods.
Four things also became apparent:
1) The close relationship of SVAC chairman Doug Zacker with the developers. Their relationship extends back to their schooldays, which gives the impression of a vested interest (either financial or social) trumping the interests of the neighborhood.
2) The intimation that the project was much farther along in the purchase and approval process. It was implied that it was being fast-tracked due to the pressing need to improve this “blighted” area. In turn, this implied a low likelihood that it would be stopped or modified substantially. This tactic serves to intimidate adjacent property owners into submission, or worse- capitulate and make their properties available to the developers.
3) The inexperience of the developers. They were struggling to answer pointed questions, and only seemed comfortable addressing the aesthetics.
4) High probability of turning into student housing. The small size of the units (65% small studios or one-bedrooms) and the proliferation of more desirable units downtown make it likely that this will appeal to students rather than permanent residents. It may be financially more viable to be built and sold to the University, permanently removing it from the tax rolls.
It is much appreciated that the next steps in the process were outlined, and a two-sided dialogue can begin.
There will be more discussion at the next Seton Village Advisory Committee Meeting,
Wednesday, March 25, 7:30pm – 8:30pm at 76 South Orange Ave/Valley, 3rd floor
I was also at the forum. Doug Zacker disclosed that he is a long standing friend of Josh Mann and Dave Kasdan due to their children attending preschool together. I'm not surprised to read your comments but he did not go to school with them himself.
And the word blighted was used. Which I found super patronising. It was like 'we want to build high end luxury rentals in your crappy neighborhood'. Totally contradictory!
I agree about the students. I found this one of the most misleading parts of the developers' presentation at the community forum. You may want to attract 'millenials and empty nesters' (as said by Josh Mann at that forum) but you're going to get students...
Also interesting that the village green article portrays SV Committee and the developers painting these residents as anti development full stop ('a premature response to say no to devekopment' - sorry, on my phone so quoting from memory). That is not my impression based on their flyer and this thread. Not a surprise I guess but kind of disappointing if you believe (like I want to) that they will be listened to. I support appropriate development here so positive change appeals to me.
And that rendering has scared me. I walk this neighborhood with my kids daily and that would ruin that whole residential block. And set the tone for more high density stuff. And, if Third & Valley is any indication, the construction would wreak havoc with irvington ave traffic (and associated side streets) for months.
It's all fine and dandy when it's new but what about 5-10 years down the road when it starts to age...too late for the neighborhood by then.
avocado said:
1) The close relationship of SVAC chairman Doug Zacker with the developers. Their relationship extends back to their schooldays, which gives the impression of a vested interest (either financial or social) trumping the interests of the neighborhood.
I am curious - who are the developers that have a relationship with Doug since his schooldays? Given that I went to school with Doug, I would be curious who these developers are.
And I can tell you 100% that Doug would never make a decision based on what you are accusing him of.
Please weigh in right now if u would like a parking lot and four story, high density building placed in your backyard. Don't all answer at once.
@scottgreenstone
This was addressed by Flipfantasia above as incorrect.
This was addressed by Flipfantasia above as incorrect.
anniewannie said:
Please weigh in right now if u would like a parking lot and four story, high density building placed in your backyard. Don't all answer at once.
I have a parking lot and three story building in my backyard. Does that count?
If it was already there when u purchased your home, no. It doesn't count.
In order to add a comment – you must Join this community – Click here to do so.
Rentals
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
Advertisement
We are residents in the vicinity of the proposed Seton Village high-density redevelopment. We came to the community forum with open minds and we support neighborhood-conscious, smart growth in Seton Village. We encourage each of you to consider the proposed development in light of its potential impact on the low-density residential character of our community.
Our goal is to raise important questions about whether the proposed high density development is appropriate in the scale and context of this neighborhood block.The developers proposed a 70+ unit, 4-story multi-family rental building on a 1.4 acre irregular lot. The majority of the proposed 4-story (approx. 57 ft) structure would be located in the backyards of the W Fairview/Tichenor/Village block, directly behind our single-family residences. The proposed building and parking lot would strip the single-family identity from W Fairview, Tichenor, Village and other surrounding streets.
We are not downtown South Orange--we have our own distinct neighborhood and residential character. This proposal would be unprecedented in our residential neighborhood because no other high-density building is tightly surrounded on all sides by single-family homes. It would set a dangerous precedent for new development in South Orange going forward and put pressure on our schools.
You may have received a summary of the recent community forum from the Seton Village Committee. It outlined useful information regarding next steps and ways to participate in the redevelopment planning process. However, there are still many serious questions and unaddressed concerns from the community about the impact of the proposed development. We hope that you join the discussion and we will keep you posted on any future meetings.
We encourage you to reach out to us directly to get involved and voice your input on this proposed large-scale development: SVResidents4PositiveChange@gmail.com
Seton Village Residents for Positive Change