BOT Vote Tonight (6/29) - Village Hall - Municipal Renovations or Adaptive Reuse
I hope a full cost-benefit analysis of all options will be shared and discussed publicly, rather than having a decision based on who gave the glitziest sales presentation.
michaelgoldberg said:
I hope a full cost-benefit analysis of all options will be shared and discussed publicly, rather than having a decision based on who gave the glitziest sales presentation.
If I recall correctly, Sheena has said several times that financials won't be made public at this meeting since the Village will then be negotiating with the chosen party. It's a shame, for sure.
And I saw the presentations in person. Glitzy isn't a word I'd use to describe any of them. Rudimentary is more on target. 
My point is that a decision for adaptive re-use cannot be made in a vacuum. If the Village chooses adaptive re-use, what then are the costs for Village Hall operations? In other words, I'd hate for everyone to get excited about some new project and then be told 6 months from now - "oh, by the way, we are now going to spend $7M to build a NEW Village Hall". (we'd be right back in the same boat we are in now)
Let's just be sure to look at the WHOLE picture and not do this piecemeal with death by 1000 paper-cuts as was done with the Firehouse, SOPAC (and Village Hall to-date).
michaelgoldberg said:
My point is that a decision for adaptive re-use cannot be made in a vacuum. If the Village chooses adaptive re-use, what then are the costs for Village Hall operations? In other words, I'd hate for everyone to get excited about some new project and then be told 6 months from now - "oh, by the way, we are now going to spend $7M to build a NEW Village Hall". (we'd be right back in the same boat we are in now)
Let's just be sure to look at the WHOLE picture and not do this piecemeal with death by 1000 paper-cuts as was done with the Firehouse, SOPAC (and Village Hall to-date).
Based on the last town hall on the subject, my understanding is that they were weighing all these options when making a decision. And, yeah, I did hear at one point that building a new town hall was open for discussion. I don't like that idea AT ALL, but it was stated, albeit briefly.
michaelgoldberg said:
Let's just be sure to look at the WHOLE picture and not do this piecemeal with death by 1000 paper-cuts as was done with the Firehouse, SOPAC (and Village Hall to-date).
Thanks for reminding us why the Village should not be in the business of doing major renovations and constructing new buildings.
FWIW, the Village started renovating Village Hall way before The Gateway and Third & Valley were started.
Yes, but neither the Gateway or Third & Valley were historic properties that needed to be gutted first. They were new buildings thrown up on vacant lots.
mbaldwin said:
michaelgoldberg said:Based on the last town hall on the subject, my understanding is that they were weighing all these options when making a decision. And, yeah, I did hear at one point that building a new town hall was open for discussion. I don't like that idea AT ALL, but it was stated, albeit briefly.
My point is that a decision for adaptive re-use cannot be made in a vacuum. If the Village chooses adaptive re-use, what then are the costs for Village Hall operations? In other words, I'd hate for everyone to get excited about some new project and then be told 6 months from now - "oh, by the way, we are now going to spend $7M to build a NEW Village Hall". (we'd be right back in the same boat we are in now)
Let's just be sure to look at the WHOLE picture and not do this piecemeal with death by 1000 paper-cuts as was done with the Firehouse, SOPAC (and Village Hall to-date).
Michael's point is, if I'm hearing him correctly, "what are the numbers?"
I understand the rental cost of their offices now is running $200k/year, and even with that it's not enough space.
If I recall, when this whole process started there was a bunch of financial hand wringing and spreadsheets that seemed to show that renting space would be cheaper than renovating and maintaining that building, once debt service was factored in. I think people were saying then that we could give the building away and still come out ahead. I wish that I could remember who those people were.
Not enough space for what? Which department does not have the space they need in the rented offices? I'm finding that hard to swallow.
jayjay said:
Not enough space for what? Which department does not have the space they need in the rented offices? I'm finding that hard to swallow.
Last I heard they needed 20 percent more space.
jayjay said:
Not enough space for what? Which department does not have the space they need in the rented offices? I'm finding that hard to swallow.
Absent any other evidence, why is that hard to believe? You need x amount of space but you have x-y. So you need to get more.
After reading the Village Green's coverage of last night's Board meeting, I had an epiphany (maybe not quite).
Our Trustees are trying to look beyond the economics of this decision, which likely favors adaptive re-use (i.e., sell building, save $6M+ construction plus future maintenance costs, receive taxes, use office space at market rent), to understand what's best for our community.
Yet, less than two months ago, 70% of voters selected a VP candidate whose opponent built her entire campaign on an anti-development, retain Village Hall platform. No amount of public comment at public meetings can speak more clearly to public sentiment on this issue than our recent municipal election. Our Trustees should take note, as they deliberate, of this stark contrast in these candidates' positions versus how voters reacted to them.
No vote was taken last night. The special meeting was continued to this evening at 7:00 pm, when it is expected that there will be a vote. The reason for the continuation is that some Trustees still had questions that have to be discussed in Executive Session. There will be an Executive Session this evening followed by the BOT special meeting.
http://southorange.org/notices.asp?guid=476c2abc
btw - The resolution on the agenda approving the South Orange Hotel Group as conditional redeveloper not name Jim Cramer as part of the group.
http://southorange.no-ip.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=138208&dbid=0
cramer said:
No vote was taken last night. The special meeting was continued to this evening at 7:00 pm, when it is expected that there will be a vote. The reason for the continuation is that some Trustees still had questions that have to be discussed in Executive Session. There will be an Executive Session this evening followed by the BOT special meeting.
http://southorange.org/notices.asp?guid=476c2abc
Just a small clarification. The meeting will be continued this evening at 7:00pm when the BOT goes into closed session. The public part of the meeting will begin at 8:00pm. No use hanging out there for an hour if you don't need to. See you all there.
tom said:
I understand the rental cost of their offices now is running $200k/year, and even with that it's not enough space.
If we are going to discuss this in terms of the rental numbers, we have to remember to subtract out the value received (directly or indirectly) for that rent
- Any landlord provided maintenance (or, alternatively, the annual maintenance costs of Village Hall)
- Any utilities/services paid for by the landlord (potentially including utilities and trash services)
- Any property taxes received for the current Village Hall site
I don't know enough to have a full opinion on the options (the financials do matter, although not exclusively), although I am most drawn to the restaurant plan, as I think it adds the most to our downtown district.
I think it is important to have a plan that maintains the history and iconic look of Village Hall, but I do not think it is that important that the Village offices are in it, in an increasingly electronic age.
I think that the restaurant plan is the only one that would add energy and tie the two ends of the Avenue together better. The hotel plan would fill a modest local need. The Village Hall restoration would preserve the historic use. All have some value.
Without Jim Cramer, I think the hotel proposal is very questionable. He would provide name recognition and would have a far greater impact on its viability. Now, for sure I'd favor Landmark.
jayjay,
I posted the resolution naming the members of the hotel group as a matter of information since Jim Cramer has received so much attention. Although I favor the restaurant if the BOT decides to go with one of the adaptive reuse proposals, the fact that Jim Cramer is not part of the South Orange Hotel Group has little effect on the name recognition. I doubt if the majority of guests who stay at the Debary Inn in Summit stay there because of Jim Cramer's involvement. Most people probably aren't even aware of it.
I beg to differ with you. Jim Cramer has frequently made mention of his inn in Summit, NJ on CNBC, and is well known as a Summit resident. His involvement would bolster chances for success. Without him, I'm not so sure.
I think its a stretch to say Jim Cramer Inn in Summit a success b/c of his name recognition. The success of the Inn in South Orange will be driven by getting Seton Hall parents among others to stay there.
As for rent.. I still think we can kill 2 birds with one stone.. foreclose on SOPAC. Turn upper floors into offices.
My thoughts on some of the recent statements:
Trans_Parent said:
Yet, less than two months ago, 70% of voters selected a VP candidate whose opponent built her entire campaign on an anti-development, retain Village Hall platform.
Having spoken to Ms. Hynes for more than just a few minutes during her campaign, I recall her making points about "smart development," but not focusing on retaining Village Hall. Based upon this sample of one, I don't know how many people who voted were aware that this was a centerpiece of her platform.
michaelgoldberg said:
I hope a full cost-benefit analysis of all options will be shared and discussed publicly, rather than having a decision based on who gave the glitziest sales presentation.
Running the basic numbers on the Precision Building contract, at 3%, the nominal amount of the contract would amortize at approximately $23,700/month ($284,400/year) over thirty years. If the current rental expense is approximately $200,000/year, it seems like a no brainer to continue renting. Of course, the amortization number assumes that the restoration comes in at the contract amount (seriously folks, what are the odds of that happening).
susan1014 said:If we are going to discuss this in terms of the rental numbers, we have to remember to subtract out the value received (directly or indirectly) for that rent
- Any landlord provided maintenance (or, alternatively, the annual maintenance costs of Village Hall)
- Any utilities/services paid for by the landlord (potentially including utilities and trash services)
- Any property taxes received for the current Village Hall site
I don't know enough to have a full opinion on the options (the financials do matter, although not exclusively), although I am most drawn to the restaurant plan, as I think it adds the most to our downtown district.
I think it is important to have a plan that maintains the history and iconic look of Village Hall, but I do not think it is that important that the Village offices are in it, in an increasingly electronic age.
I think that the restaurant plan is the only one that would add energy and tie the two ends of the Avenue together better. The hotel plan would fill a modest local need. The Village Hall restoration would preserve the historic use. All have some value.
This^^. The Village also generates income in the form of real property taxes if the property is sold and restored. But, to me, the more important consideration is the ability of a successful restaurant to connect and revitalize the retail area East of Scotland Road. I don't think that the value of that can be understated.
Lastly (for now, at least), we need to remember that the municipal offices have only been housed at Village Hall for about 40 years. Prior to that it served as the home of SOPD and, before that, SOFD. During the SOPD and SOFD eras (and, even during the Village Hall era), how often did people enjoy the property? Adaptively re-using it as a restaurant will allow for many people to actively enjoy the historic space* from both the inside and the outside.
*I hope (and assume) that if the property is sold for adaptive re-use, the Village will retain, among other things, all rights to use of the iconic image of the property as well as control over its use by third parties, including the purchaser.
Just to clarify the question on the restaurant proposal total capacity & employees in regards to parking issues. See attached submitted drawings.
Steve said:
*I hope (and assume) that if the property is sold for adaptive re-use, the Village will retain, among other things, all rights to use of the iconic image of the property as well as control over its use by third parties, including the purchaser.
I assume this is not a boolean sell or renovate decision. There must be a number of creative ways, such as a lease, that a good lawyer could come up with to accomplish the things you are proposing above.
How about retaining right of first refusal in any subsequent sale, or forcing a sale to the town in case of bankruptcy or foreclosure?
IANA(real estate or intellectual property)L and this is not legal advice, but I would presume that the deed restrictions/contractual provisions could be put in place to ensure that the Village's interest in the image and a residual interest in the real estate/improvements could be protected sufficiently. It's hardly rocket science.
Featured Events
-
Stephen Whitty Presents - Hometown Movie Stars: The Celebrated Actors Of CHS
May 6, 2024 at 7:00pm
Below is the message I sent to neighborhood leaders this morning for distribution.
Neighborhood Leaders,
First I wanted to thank you for helping distribute information about Village Hall and its future and the various options that will be before the Board of Trustees tonight.
To recap, in late 2014, the Board of Trustees agreed to explore the sale of Village Hall for adaptive reuse purposes at the same time that it was pursuing renovation for municipal purposes. As a part of the requirements for adaptive reuse, it was mandated that the building must be preserved to strict historic standards.
Bids for the municipal renovation have been received along with two offers for the adaptive reuse of the building. The choices are as follows:
*Municipal Renovations*
Village Hall will remain as the location for municipal purposes.
Proposed floor plans can be found here: http://villagegreennj.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/111014-SOVH-1.pdf
*Boutique Hotel*
South Orange Hotel Group is proposing a boutique hotel.
A sample of their work includes the DeBary Inn in Summit, NJ: http://www.thedebaryinn-summit.com/index.htm
Proposed floor plans can be found here: http://southorange.org/SouthOrangeVillageHallHotel-ConceptualFloorplans.pdf
*Restaurant*
Landmark Hospitality is proposing a restaurant on the first floor with meeting space and a banquet hall on the second floor. A sample of their work includes Liberty House Restaurant inside Liberty State Park (Jersey City); Stone House at Stirling Ridge (Warren) and The Ryland Inn (Whitehouse Station).
Visit their website to see more of their work: http://www.landmarkhospitality.com
Proposed floor plans can be found here: http://southorange.org/LandmarkRestaurantProposalFloorplans.pdf
The Board of Trustees hosted a Special Meeting on June 15 for the purposes of a community forum to discuss this issue and get feedback and answer questions. The meeting video can be found here: http://view.earthchannel.com/PlayerController.aspx?PGD=southorangenj&eID=37
Tonight’s meeting will be at the South Orange Performing Arts Center at 8:00pm. Please encourage your neighbors to join us. If you have not yet submitted any comments, please feel free to shoot me an email at scollum@southorange.org and I will share the feedback I receive with the full governing body.
Thanks again and please help distribute this message to your neighbors.
Sheena