Third and Valley Question

Went by today and noticed that the sidewalk on Valley St. has a regular concrete sidewalk instead of the normal red/brown brick that most of the village has. Anybody know why they were allowed to take down the nice sidewalk and replace it with something so bland? 

When the Avenue and the Gateway were built, they both installed new red/brown bricks on the sidewalk. Why can't Jonathan Rose; and why would the town allow them to get away with it?

Bump

I don't know, but the 3rd Street side (where Valley National and Wells Fargo are located) has always had the traditional concrete sidewalks, and most of the new building faces 3rd Street. Personally I find the brick walks more difficult to navigate (are more slippery) when the walks ice up, so I can't say I'll miss the bricks.

The building is grotesque and you're worried about the sidewalk?

BillyBarroo said:
The building is grotesque and you're worried about the sidewalk?

I agree with that, I think the building is way too tall, but the least Jonathan Rose could do is put back the sidewalk that they dug up.

I love it.  Any word on the retail going in as well as what's going in the old Pro Pets space?  Bareburger anyone?

valley st did not have brick, so I don't know what you are talking about

There's brick across 3rd Street and also across Valley. 

Maybe they're putting in concrete temporarily, because they're still moving heavy equipment over everything.

mod said:
valley st did not have brick, so I don't know what you are talking about

Yes it did, the brick sidewalk goes all the way down to 5th St.

so_newstead said:

mod said:
valley st did not have brick, so I don't know what you are talking about

Yes it did, the brick sidewalk goes all the way down to 5th St.

Provided without comment:

Ok, so we can close this thread. Excellent.

Here is what I was talking about, a good portion of both sides had brick on the sidewalk and a Belgian block curb.

evandepol said:
Ok, so we can close this thread. Excellent.

Bwah ha ha ha HA HA HA HAAAAA!

You truly thought you could vanquish an MOL thread about development?!?!?

You know not the power of opinion in a public chat forum, optimistic tiny man. 

I tried

so_newstead said:

BillyBarroo said:
The building is grotesque and you're worried about the sidewalk?

I agree with that, I think the building is way too tall, but the least Jonathan Rose could do is put back the sidewalk that they dug up.

Agreed. Way to big for the space its on and the development looks out of place. 

Our planning boards and our trustee boards approve these mammoth structures without any regard to visuals, traffic impact, infrastructure impact, etc. I personally cannot understand how this continuously goes unchecked until the thing is built and everyone starts complaining ( it's too big, the sidewalk isn't right, the building overwhelms the landscape, etc.) The developers want to maximize profits at our expense and will continue to do so unless their plans are modified or nullified by tax paying residents.

annielou said:
Our planning boards and our trustee boards approve these mammoth structures without any regard to visuals, traffic impact, infrastructure impact, etc. I personally cannot understand how this continuously goes unchecked until the thing is built and everyone starts complaining ( it's too big, the sidewalk isn't right, the building overwhelms the landscape, etc.) The developers want to maximize profits at our expense and will continue to do so unless their plans are modified or nullified by tax paying residents.

I think the goal of the town government is to build more and more of these types of structures, 3-4 story apartment buildings with ground level retail. Think Montclair or Summit--I think that is what they hope the town--and specifically Valley--will look like in the future.

Unfortunately, South Orange does not have the spaciousness in terms of land miles as Summit and Montclair. Look across the street on Valley and you have 2 to 3 family homes that dwarfs in comparison to this mammoth luxury rentals. Too me, it looks awkward.

annielou said:
Our planning boards and our trustee boards approve these mammoth structures without any regard to visuals, traffic impact, infrastructure impact, etc. I personally cannot understand how this continuously goes unchecked until the thing is built and everyone starts complaining ( it's too big, the sidewalk isn't right, the building overwhelms the landscape, etc.) The developers want to maximize profits at our expense and will continue to do so unless their plans are modified or nullified by tax paying residents.

For what it's worth, remember that MOL is a small self selecting community.  By no means is "everyone" complaining.  Just a few posters here.

FilmCarp said:

annielou said:
Our planning boards and our trustee boards approve these mammoth structures without any regard to visuals, traffic impact, infrastructure impact, etc. I personally cannot understand how this continuously goes unchecked until the thing is built and everyone starts complaining ( it's too big, the sidewalk isn't right, the building overwhelms the landscape, etc.) The developers want to maximize profits at our expense and will continue to do so unless their plans are modified or nullified by tax paying residents.

For what it's worth, remember that MOL is a small self selecting community.  By no means is "everyone" complaining.  Just a few posters here.

Quite a few neighbors bring it up in face-to-face conversation as well. It's an out of scale structure by most accounts. My point, however, is more cautionary regarding the process by which stuff gets built in the future.

annielou said:
Our planning boards and our trustee boards approve these mammoth structures without any regard to visuals, traffic impact, infrastructure impact, etc.

The fact that you disagree with the decision does not mean these issues weren't considered.  Honestly, this statement is kind of ridiculous.  Do you really believe this?

I would gently refer you to the minutes from years of planning meetings.

Just encouraging residents to attend future planning meetings re: future projects. The actual visual impact of this particular project is already being discussed. It remains to be seen how traffic, etc. will be impacted, despite the "years of planning meetings".

so_newstead said:
Here is what I was talking about, a good portion of both sides had brick on the sidewalk and a Belgian block curb.

Looks like they will incorporate the Belgian block curb according to this drawing.

Apparently South Orange is not immune to hyperbole and innuendo either.

mjh said:

annielou said:
Our planning boards and our trustee boards approve these mammoth structures without any regard to visuals, traffic impact, infrastructure impact, etc.

The fact that you disagree with the decision does not mean these issues weren't considered.  Honestly, this statement is kind of ridiculous.  Do you really believe this?
I would gently refer you to the minutes from years of planning meetings.

The other day I was stopped at the traffic light there and noticed the overhead wires directly in front of the building (on Valley), which are not visible in the rendering above.  Those poles/wires make the building appear even more imposing and closer to the street and I wonder if they will be put underground or moved at all.

I like how they use trees at the left edge of the illustration to disguise how monstrously huge the thing is.

It's a nice-looking building that will bring life and excitement to what used to be a dreary, industrial stretch of Valley. It will likely extend the Village's walking and shopping area and will add new residents and stores to the area. Some people will always resist change, but this seems like a total positive to me. 

relx said:

annielou said:
Our planning boards and our trustee boards approve these mammoth structures without any regard to visuals, traffic impact, infrastructure impact, etc. I personally cannot understand how this continuously goes unchecked until the thing is built and everyone starts complaining ( it's too big, the sidewalk isn't right, the building overwhelms the landscape, etc.) The developers want to maximize profits at our expense and will continue to do so unless their plans are modified or nullified by tax paying residents.

I think the goal of the town government is to build more and more of these types of structures, 3-4 story apartment buildings with ground level retail. Think Montclair or Summit--I think that is what they hope the town--and specifically Valley--will look like in the future.

phenixrising said:
Unfortunately, South Orange does not have the spaciousness in terms of land miles as Summit and Montclair. Look across the street on Valley and you have 2 to 3 family homes that dwarfs in comparison to this mammoth luxury rentals. Too me, it looks awkward.

Becoming downtown Montclair is not a bad thing. But the days of those 2 to 3 family homes are probably numbered.

imonlysleeping said:
It's a nice-looking building that will bring life and excitement to what used to be a dreary, industrial stretch of Valley. It will likely extend the Village's walking and shopping area and will add new residents and stores to the area. Some people will always resist change, but this seems like a total positive to me. 

I worry a little about traffic. There simply are not many ways to travel E-W and W-E through the village. I would not be surprised to see traffic diverting down to Jefferson and even West Montrose. But ultimately it is a net positive.

imonlysleeping said:
It's a nice-looking building that will bring life and excitement to what used to be a dreary, industrial stretch of Valley. It will likely extend the Village's walking and shopping area and will add new residents and stores to the area. Some people will always resist change, but this seems like a total positive to me. 

Industrial? There is 1 small warehouse on valley, how is it industrial?