Proposed redevelopment in Seton Village

I think the challenge is that the current owner of the property is, to quote an earlier poster, infamous in South Orange for being a poor commercial property owner. So, it is likely that he is only willing to sell the entire property at a high price that would make it uneconomical to only develop the Irvington Ave. frontage.

South Orange is building up too quickly. All of a sudden it's beginning to look like a city and not a village. Too many apartments and too many people !! It's a shame.

jimmurphy said:

Does anyone here know the current zoning for this parcel of land?

I believe (and I could be wrong) that Tichenor is zoned for multi-family and West Fairview is zoned for single-family. So I'm not sure how that works, since this is split.

peter_watts said:

This is truly an awful proposal and out of character with the neighborhood. I hope this gets the same scrutiny as the Orange Lawn development because this looks like even more intensive use of property. Someone used the term "shoehorn" and that's pretty accurate. This seems even closer to the neighbors than the monolith going on on Third and Valley.

Sadly, Mr. Zacker's comments in the Village Green article make me question the credibility of the Seton Village Committee, which at this point seems like a mouthpiece for developers' interests. Can we go back to organizing food truck festivals instead of working to line developers pockets?

I'm going to stay out of the Seton Village proposal debate, but as a neighbor of 3rd and Valley who has been inconvenienced by the construction and who will have a minute added to his daily commute, I am still very happy about what is going on at that location.

Sloan Street south of 2nd Street and 3rd Street east of the tracks are unpleasant and ugly. I don't get any joy out of walking there and feel impatient about getting to the livelier part of downtown South Orange. I never feel unsafe walking on Sloan Street even when it is deserted, but I'd rather see more people on it.

3rd + Valley is going to make 3rd street itself a much more attractive place to walk and give a nice punctuation to Sloan Street. If the retail/restaurants are a success I'll be glad to have someplace new to go.

How is 3rd + Valley a "monolith"? From the drawings it will be various accents around the windows, retail space, arches, and have complex massing. My idea of "monolithic" apartments are unadorned, monochrome structures with flat roofs like the Ivy Hill Apartments. I don't feel like arguing over a definition of "monolith," but I think 3rd + Valley is much more attractive than most modern apartment buildings.

jimmurphy said:

Does anyone here know the current zoning for this parcel of land?

The current zoning allows for commercial and/or townhome residential along the Irvington Ave Corridor. This zoning does not extend into the interior of the residential block. In fact, we have recently learned that a few years ago, the Village took steps to preserve the interior of the lot under an Open Space initiative. The proposed redevelopment would be an abrupt change in the way the Village has approached this lot, and would not be consistent with current zoning.

This is the core of our message: to support development that is consistent with the vision and planning studies that have been undertaken over many years for this irregular, largely single-family residential lot.

annemarie said:

jimmurphy said:

Does anyone here know the current zoning for this parcel of land?

I believe (and I could be wrong) that Tichenor is zoned for multi-family and West Fairview is zoned for single-family. So I'm not sure how that works, since this is split.

Is this one big parcel, or a number of smaller parcels owned by Sayid? Are all of the parcels zoned the same?

Seems like the first step is to find out exactly what he can build by right, as indicated by the zoning. If the "monolith" is allowed by the zoning of the entire parcel, then this will be an uphill battle. If not, then it would seem that the immediate neighbors should fight tooth and nail against any zoning changes.

A result in compliance with the vision plan would seem to be a great result.

Edited to add - just saw SetonVillageResident's post - sounds like you've got it covered. I for one would applaud the use of our Open Space Tax revenues to purchase the interior property.

I have to agree with JBennett - we are directly impacted by 3rd and Valley. I think it's an incredibly positive development and not at all a monolith in the renderings. It's a vast improvement on the crap that was there before (the car dealership and gas station were still there when we moved here). I'm praying it spurs improvement to the eyesore of an auto place across the street.

Development is not necessarily a bad thing. It is a large developable parcel of land on Irvington (that the neighboring homeowners presumably knew was developable when they purchased next door?). The developer is opening a dialogue with the neighborhood to get input, which is a good thing. The designs can be tweaked. I hope neighbors are active in the dialogue and don't just shoot everything down for the sake of shooting it down.

annemarie said:

jimmurphy said:

Does anyone here know the current zoning for this parcel of land?

I believe (and I could be wrong) that Tichenor is zoned for multi-family and West Fairview is zoned for single-family. So I'm not sure how that works, since this is split.

Tichenor is zoned for two-family, as is the interior of these lots behind the commercial/townhomes zoning mentioned by @SetonVillageResident at the front of the parcel under consideration.

On my way past this morning, the Victorian that houses the C.A.M.P daycare is beautiful and it would be sad to see it torn down. Would make an awesome store or cafe (which would say 'cool college town' vibe far more than some Gateway style thing). Though it's owned by Project Sign, who seems like a great business owner and good landlord (based entirely on how attractive the outside of the daycare looks). Would also be a shame to see that type of business owner go just as things start to improve (I'm think Morgan's here and the grants to improve facades).

Also there are a lot of mature trees so water run off should be looked at. Pervious surface or not, stripping an already-dense part of town of trees and covering these lots 100% while also adding a huge building seems the opposite of all the green-ness going on along the river path.

annabanana said:

This is in my neighborhood, and I'm for it. Irvington ave, as is, needs help, and if this kickstarts development, I'm on board. It's a major road, and I would expect that's the sort of place large buildings go. If this were proposed for a teensy side street in the the middle of a purely residential neighborhood, that's different. I don't think you can buy a home that is on the same block as a main road like this and not assume some risk that there will be development on that road. Of course, it doesn't mean you have to like it, but it isn't an unfair expectation.

Absolutely not. There is a HUGE difference between being on a main commercial road, and being just around the corner on a residential street. Housing values reflect this. Zoning recognizes this. Zoning on Irvington Avenue is different than the zoning on the side streets.

Typically, a home is the single largest investment any family will ever make. Zoning protects that investment and neighborhoods in general. When a family or individual purchases a home, they are placing their faith and trust in the zoning that protects their home, their neighborhood, their investment and in their elected officials to honor that protection.

I think it is fine if Irvington Avenue is developed as long as it is with respect to the zoning and in keeping with the neighborhood. But to change the zoning to allow commercial development deep into the area that is strictly residential represents what is effectively a theft from every homeowner in that area and is a betrayal of that trust.

I agree that if you purchase a home adjacent to a vacant lot that is zoned for denser development you must expect that at some point denser development will occur, but that IS NOT the case with the development proposed here.

Bee said:

Development is not necessarily a bad thing. It is a large developable parcel of land on Irvington (that the neighboring homeowners presumably knew was developable when they purchased next door?).

Yes, those of us who bought here knew it was a developable property when we bought here. BUT, in doing due diligence prior to purchasing, the lot was zoned for townhouses with commercial development along the Irvington Ave corridor with open space in the rear of the property (see the maps above). What THIS PARTICULAR proposal attempts to do is throw out that zoning, and disregard the master plan for the area and ask the blessing of the town in order to do so. To me, that's a waste of taxpayer dollars. Go through the master planning process, get input from all the stakeholders, pay consultants an exorbitant amount of money, all to have it thrown out in favor of something shinier.

Bee said:

The developer is opening a dialogue with the neighborhood to get input, which is a good thing. The designs can be tweaked. I hope neighbors are active in the dialogue and don't just shoot everything down for the sake of shooting it down.

I don't think the neighbors are shooting it down for the sake of shooting it down. There is ONE retail space in the proposed property. The bulk of the development are apartments.

I walked down Cottage Street today and was struck by how the lack of planning and thoughtful development can really destroy the sense of community. I wouldn't be surprised if the lack of planning and thoughtful development is really whats driving the objections, as opposed to THIS PARTICULAR development. This is the first development. It needs to be considered carefully. And dialogue IS good, if messy at times.

There is absolutely no comparison between the parcel of land designated for third and valley and the narrow, heavily residential property on Irvington Avenue.

The Seton Village Committee meets tonight at the temporary location for Village Hall at 76 South Orange Ave., suite 302. The meeting starts at 7:30 pm. All the meetings are open to the public and have Public Comment time. Everyone is welcome.

Hope to see you there!

michaelgoldberg 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.

Certainly not anyone who's property borders that massive building, though.

But it would have to be better than the neglected property it is now wouldn't it? It seems to be quite uncared for and has been for years. Property that looks like that usually attracts small, unwanted woodland creatures. That certainly can't be good either.

That's the choice? A cornfield (with couch) or high density apartments? Where does that script come from?

Pirate8613 said:

michaelgoldberg 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.

Certainly not anyone who's property borders that massive building, though.

But it would have to be better than the neglected property it is now wouldn't it? It seems to be quite uncared for and has been for years. Property that looks like that usually attracts small, unwanted woodland creatures. That certainly can't be good either.

And the owner of the neglected property owns lots of other uncared for sites (look at the corner the Blue Plate Special is on). As a newcomer, I don't know the ins and outs but seems like the village has been complicit in allowing the property (and his other properties) to get into this state. Does that bode well for making sure this site is appropriately developed? This is making me wonder how much any of this transparent, open dialogue can be trusted!

Glad the residents are organizing and will add my support. I can't make tonight's meeting but will go to the Development Committee one next Thurs.

Interesting Q about who is more undesirable: a raccoon (or whatever woodland creature you have in mind) or high density development?

Edited to remove any unintended offence to SHU students.

sorry...just laughing...

Just a reminder that our email address is: SVResidents4PositiveChange@gmail.com

If you would like to be kept up to date with all relevant meetings, updates, etc, please shoot us an email!

And for those of you who have already reached out: thank you!

anniewannie said:

That's the choice? A cornfield (with couch) or high density apartments? Where does that script come from?

I love that that dude grows corn on The Irv.

It should be mentioned that the township is entertaining a redevelopment plan that would be catered to the developer's project concept. Since this is a redevelopment process, the existing zoning is almost insignificant. The township is authorized to craft new zoning through the redevelopment plan.

It is my hope that the redevelopment plan will be responsive to the existing master planning documents prepared for this particular area, including the Vision Plan and the open space and recreation elements of the master plan. It would be good planning practice to be responsive and considerate of these efforts instead of letting the developers drive the redevelopment process. It seems like if the existing zoning is out of date, the township should have been proactive in creating a redevelopment plan or rezoning the site prior to soliciting proposals from developers.

Can't they just put a WaWa in there instead like Maplewood is getting?

flipfantasia said:

Pirate8613 said:

michaelgoldberg 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.

Certainly not anyone who's property borders that massive building, though.

But it would have to be better than the neglected property it is now wouldn't it? It seems to be quite uncared for and has been for years. Property that looks like that usually attracts small, unwanted woodland creatures. That certainly can't be good either.

And the owner of the neglected property owns lots of other uncared for sites (look at the corner the Blue Plate Special is on). As a newcomer, I don't know the ins and outs but seems like the village has been complicit in allowing the property (and his other properties) to get into this state. Does that bode well for making sure this site is appropriately developed? This is making me wonder how much any of this transparent, open dialogue can be trusted!

Glad the residents are organizing and will add my support. I can't make tonight's meeting but will go to the Development Committee one next Thurs.

Interesting Q about who is more undesirable: a raccoon (or whatever woodland creature you have in mind) or possibly 100+ renters (Seton Hall students?).

One way to make the owner of the neglected properties step up and either improve the properties or sell them would be to tax him for the vacant properties that remain unoccupied and increase the taxes the longer they remain that way. Also, for properties in disrepair he should be fined. The village, for whatever reason, seems unwilling to do this. I would love to know why. If it is because of some law currently on the books then maybe it is time to change the laws.

I can't believe you are comparing SHU students to rodents. Really insulting and uncalled for. I think an apartment building with a mix of of college students, empty-nesters and mid to later 20-somethings would be great. From the plans discussed here it seems like those would be the groups most likely to be attracted to this type of housing option. It would bring a new dynamic to the Irvington Avenue area and if the area was ever cleaned up (I'm assuming the aforementioned neglectful owner owns many of these properties as well) and made to look more inviting it would be an attractive addition to the Village.

The town did not solicit proposals for this parcel.

@Pirate8613 I apologize - I was not comparing students to rodents, or not intentionally so I'm sorry it read like that. I will amend my comment. I like my neighborhood'so proximity to SHU, have students as neighbors already (albeit in a single family home) and wish this part of town had a better college town vibe.

@Pirate8613 I would also love to know why about enforcement/fines etc.

flipfantasia said:

@Pirate8613 I apologize - I was not comparing students to rodents, or not intentionally so I'm sorry it read like that. I will amend my comment. I like my neighborhood'so proximity to SHU, have students as neighbors already (albeit in a single family home) and wish this part of town had a better college town vibe.

Thanks flipfantasia. Like you, I wish the town had a better college vibe as well. This maybe part of the reason I like this apartment idea because while it is close to the university making it desirable for students looking to live off campus, undergrads and well as graduate students, it is not campus housing and while in a residential area it is not putting students in single family homes. It gives students and other local residents a chance to live with each other and get to know each other. Another benefit to both students and empty-nesters is no one is responsible for maintaining property (yes, keep your apartment clean and well kept but stuff like shoveling and mowing the lawn you don't have to worry about). Maybe the noise will be reduced as well because instead of being in a house where you may not realize how the noise travels to your neighbors you are now only separated by a wall where you know that blasting the stereo is going to be heard by your no-longer-looking-to-party-all-night neighbor. This place could also bring some needed life to an area that until recently went unnoticed by the rest of the Village. With a place to go at night to eat and hang-out students in the area may be drawn to Irvington Avenue to hang out with friends instead of having parties at home. It could be the start of a vibrant mini downtown neighborhood which I think would be good for all residents.

Pirate8613 said:

It could be the start of a vibrant mini downtown neighborhood which I think would be good for all residents.

Completely agree. And, for reference, it aligns with the mission statement of the Seton Village Committee: "To create a thriving Irvington Avenue which attracts patrons, residents and the Seton Hall community with diverse shops and restaurants, and a safe, attractive and vibrant neighborhood."

Pirate8613 said:

flipfantasia said:

@Pirate8613 I apologize - I was not comparing students to rodents, or not intentionally so I'm sorry it read like that. I will amend my comment. I like my neighborhood'so proximity to SHU, have students as neighbors already (albeit in a single family home) and wish this part of town had a better college town vibe.

Thanks flipfantasia. Like you, I wish the town had a better college vibe as well. This maybe part of the reason I like this apartment idea because while it is close to the university making it desirable for students looking to live off campus, undergrads and well as graduate students, it is not campus housing and while in a residential area it is not putting students in single family homes. It gives students and other local residents a chance to live with each other and get to know each other. Another benefit to both students and empty-nesters is no one is responsible for maintaining property (yes, keep your apartment clean and well kept but stuff like shoveling and mowing the lawn you don't have to worry about). Maybe the noise will be reduced as well because instead of being in a house where you may not realize how the noise travels to your neighbors you are now only separated by a wall where you know that blasting the stereo is going to be heard by your no-longer-looking-to-party-all-night neighbor. This place could also bring some needed life to an area that until recently went unnoticed by the rest of the Village. With a place to go at night to eat and hang-out students in the area may be drawn to Irvington Avenue to hang out with friends instead of having parties at home. It could be the start of a vibrant mini downtown neighborhood which I think would be good for all residents.

Our concern is density. The market determines who lives where. Seton Hall students or any other people are always welcome to join our neighborhood--we simply request that the neighborhood is developed in line with the vision, plan, and zoning outlined by the Village and by residents.

A dense building + parking lot that intrudes into the interior of this small, irregular residential lot is not consistent with good planning practices or smart growth. This central fact is at the core of our position.

If the corridor-facing area is developed into low-density residential, then we will welcome the new residents with open arms, whoever they may be.