The Sale of the Village Post Office and Adjacent lots: Your Views Should Be Heard

ice said:
Posted by June on Dec 18, 2013: "I have yet to hear a serious, thought through and economically viable alternative idea.".... and 18 months later, after all the efforts to derail the proposed project, the opponents, while exerting huge amounts of effort on organizing, fundraising, sign-planting, campaigning and filing lawsuits, STILL have not come up with the one very basic thing that would truly help their cause: "a serious, thought through and economically viable alternative".

on the ohno60 FB page, they are still, as of last week spitballing ideas, looking for "creative inspiration." If they don't have serious, workable ideas at this point, what additional creative inspiration can they be looking for, and how long should we leave a vacant building on the site while we wait?

ml1 said:

ice said:
Posted by June on Dec 18, 2013: "I have yet to hear a serious, thought through and economically viable alternative idea.".... and 18 months later, after all the efforts to derail the proposed project, the opponents, while exerting huge amounts of effort on organizing, fundraising, sign-planting, campaigning and filing lawsuits, STILL have not come up with the one very basic thing that would truly help their cause: "a serious, thought through and economically viable alternative".

on the ohno60 FB page, they are still, as of last week spitballing ideas, looking for "creative inspiration." If they don't have serious, workable ideas at this point, what additional creative inspiration can they be looking for, and how long should we leave a vacant building on the site while we wait?

So that means I'll continue farming my unicorns in Utopia?

No news of jeremiah_birnbaum? Pity. I've been going through a lot of the old threads on this topic and I'd like to ask him what it was that changed this opinion of the Post Office building as sent in an email to Jerry Ryan on December 10th 2013:

"in the case of the redevelopment of the Post Office site, Maplewood has a unique, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to redevelop our downtown to truly represent the soul of our community - a place for gathering, a place to celebrate the beauty of our town, and to finally be rid of the eyesore that is the Eisenhower-era Post Office in favor of trees, sky, and community space"

https://maplewood.worldwebs.com/forums/discussion/id/102530-Dickens-Village-versus-Transit-Village-a-Creeping-Malaise?page=2#comment-2639072

Into this one of the same building here on MOL on January 5th, 2014, less than one month later:

"Most importantly, we should be talking about the historic value of the current building, which is a unique example of mid-century modern architecture; International-style scaled to Maplewood's size. If Maplewood is "green", then the first thing we should do is use what we have in the existing Post Office structure -- a fine, well-constructed building with plenty of life left in it, which was designed by a local architect (the late Alfred O. Pollitt, past president of Newark AIA) in harmony with Maplewood's low scale."

https://maplewood.worldwebs.com/forums/discussion/id/103086-People-are-talking-Maplewood-is-not-for-sale-#comment-2651530

ice said:
Therein lies a big part of the problem, Woot. In the absence of realistic alternatives, it becomes all about the unicorn farms. About two weeks ago, I was speaking to an aquaintance who told me "I don't want apartments there, I'd like a big restaurant with great food and awesome music". When I asked her how she expected a project like that to get paid for, or how it would make money, she said she really didn't care about all those "details". Just no apartments, and awesome music. Seriously. It's kinda sad, but even the organized opposition seems to be thinking down close to this level.

I wonder how many times that acquaintance of yours went to Highland Place?

Woot said:

ml1 said:

ice said:
Posted by June on Dec 18, 2013: "I have yet to hear a serious, thought through and economically viable alternative idea.".... and 18 months later, after all the efforts to derail the proposed project, the opponents, while exerting huge amounts of effort on organizing, fundraising, sign-planting, campaigning and filing lawsuits, STILL have not come up with the one very basic thing that would truly help their cause: "a serious, thought through and economically viable alternative".

on the ohno60 FB page, they are still, as of last week spitballing ideas, looking for "creative inspiration." If they don't have serious, workable ideas at this point, what additional creative inspiration can they be looking for, and how long should we leave a vacant building on the site while we wait?

So that means I'll continue farming my unicorns in Utopia?

get ready for concerts on the loading dock! year-round! all we need are firepits! (apparently no one asked any musicians what they think of playing outdoors in January, firepit or no firepit).

ridski said:

ice said:
Therein lies a big part of the problem, Woot. In the absence of realistic alternatives, it becomes all about the unicorn farms. About two weeks ago, I was speaking to an aquaintance who told me "I don't want apartments there, I'd like a big restaurant with great food and awesome music". When I asked her how she expected a project like that to get paid for, or how it would make money, she said she really didn't care about all those "details". Just no apartments, and awesome music. Seriously. It's kinda sad, but even the organized opposition seems to be thinking down close to this level.

I wonder how many times that acquaintance of yours went to Highland Place?

two out of three ain't bad.

Has she ever been to Hat City Kitchen. 3 miles from The center of Downtown Maplewood. A 10 minute drive. Live music every night

ice said:
By Ridski: "I wonder how many times that acquaintance of yours went to Highland Place?".... actually my favorite part of the conversation was when she described her musical restaurant, she said "if they do that, I would totally go there." So I guess we have a business plan!

ice said:
By Ridski: "I wonder how many times that acquaintance of yours went to Highland Place?".... actually my favorite part of the conversation was when she described her musical restaurant, she said "if they do that, I would totally go there." So I guess we have a business plan!

would she refuse to go to such a restaurant if there were apartments on the floors above? that's the puzzling part of the objections to new development. many of the other uses are completely compatible with apartments, but the ohno people act as though restaurants/galleries/plazas and apartment units are mutually exclusive.

Jeremiah Birnbaum said:

"a fine, well-constructed building with plenty of life left in it, which was designed by a local architect (the late Alfred O. Pollitt, past president of Newark AIA) in harmony with Maplewood's low scale."

And you will be hard-pressed to find a better example of trivia presented as if it actually matters to anybody.

ml1 said:
I guess we have to take people at their word, but I'm skeptical of people who say they "assumed" reuse was not even a possibility when the RFP went out from the township. if the building is so beautiful and significant, and re-use is such an awesome idea, why not ask the question? if a person is so passionately devoted to adaptive re-use, why not even raise one peep about it at the time the RFP was issued? Why would someone assume that a building that looks like a fortress, and was built as a fallout shelter was structurally unsound?
I have my own assumptions about why someone would not have raised those issues then and raises them now. But I won't voice my assumptions because

Exactly, if Inda is/was such a preservationist, and wanted used her submission to show the TC what other options might look like, why not propose re-using the building as part of her design.

as a community, we often have Champagne tastes and visions but a Natty Light willingness to spend money.

hankzona said:
as a community, we often have Champagne tastes and visions but a Natty Light willingness to spend money.

that's the truth.

If I had my druthers, I'd love a wonderful performance space, with a gallery and a public "living room." I'd even be willing to pay the property taxes to support it. But I know that something like 95% of Maplewoodians would not want to have that on their dime. And I respect that, because I know that for a lot of people taxes are already a burden.

We couldn't get an artificial turf field at DeHart, at least in part over the (unfounded) fear that the state would leave Maplewood with the tab for the improvement. And that was a facility that would have been used by literally thousands of residents throughout the year.

If we can't get a recreation facility approved because of fears that the town would get stuck with the bill, why should we expect to have a winter garden/architecture museum/gallery/concert hall that won't be financially self-sustaining?

hankzona said:
as a community, we often have Champagne tastes and visions but a Natty Light willingness to spend money.

I think you are misunderstanding me Hank. I have Champagne tastes with your money and Natty Light with my own.

ice said:
Therein lies a big part of the problem, Woot. In the absence of realistic alternatives, it becomes all about the unicorn farms. About two weeks ago, I was speaking to an aquaintance who told me "I don't want apartments there, I'd like a big restaurant with great food and awesome music". When I asked her how she expected a project like that to get paid for, or how it would make money, she said she really didn't care about all those "details". Just no apartments, and awesome music. Seriously. It's kinda sad, but even the organized opposition seems to be thinking down close to this level.

Well aware. It is easy to build resistance. Just offer up restaurants, music, parking, u-turns for Kings trucks, sight lines for Author, engagement for John Harvey, reuse for Inde, political power for Frank Underwood Fred Profetta and a Unicorn Farm for me.

Then, simply create hysteria about the existing plans (60 feet tall, Kings opposes, chains stores, environmental benefits, reduced parking, increased competition against prone local stores).

If that's not enough, file a lawsuit.

What is hard is building consensus in a town of 25k

Why has this thread been revived?

DaveSchmidt said:

ctrzaska said:
Dave's Exhibit A was supporting one particular part of my post. Forgive me, but I'm missing the relevance of Exhibit B to it.

There was none. It was for those, like ArchBroad and Woot, who have characterized reuse as a Johnny-come-lately among the list of complaints.

Ah. Thanks.

Bump.

ArchBroad said:
Ideas for reuse came in 2013 and 2014. The open public meetings asking for input and suggestions were in 2012.


ETA: Specifically it was January 2013 when ideas were asked for and December 2013 when reuse came up on MOL. That's almost two years too late at the earliest mention it seems. 5 months too late if you only count the July 2013 date of the Redevelopment Plan being issued, but by then the decision had long been made.

DaveSchmidt said:

ctrzaska said:
Dave's Exhibit A was supporting one particular part of my post. Forgive me, but I'm missing the relevance of Exhibit B to it.

There was none. It was for those, like ArchBroad and Woot, who have characterized reuse as a Johnny-come-lately among the list of complaints.

CONFUSED said:
Why has this thread been revived?

Because I'm an idiot

ridski said:

CONFUSED said:
Why has this thread been revived?

Because I'm an idiot

It doesn't have that new thread smell, for sure.

Don't worry. They'd be hashing out the same old arguments on another thread if this wasn't here.

ridski said:

CONFUSED said:
Why has this thread been revived?

Because I'm an idiot

LOL.

CONFUSED said:
Why has this thread been revived?

Ridski had too many tabs.

One tab at a time, fellas, otherwise things get messy

Tab, Mr Pibb or Dr Pepper?

Don't click on the brown tabs.

Or eat them.