Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-13-2018, 11:00 AM
 
12,883 posts, read 13,893,032 times
Reputation: 18448

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pretorius View Post
People who oppose the project should raise money and buy the 750 Walnut property - then preserve it as an empty office building and parking lot. Perhaps Cranford can buy it and fund the purchase with a special tax assessment on Cranford real estate owners.

Seriously, converting obsolete office and industrial buildings in northern New Jersey to residential uses has become a trend. Hartz Mountain is one of the best at it. I wouldn't bet against them, especially with state law on their side. Hartz is smarter than the people opposing the 750 Walnut project, based on the comments from the opponents.

And why are people against new residents? Both Clark and Cranford have populations today that are thousands below the 1970s peak. Plus, 750 Walnut renters will benefit local businesses and add to the base of future homebuyers in Clark and Cranford.
Cranford bought the Birchwood property in an attempt to control what goes on the property and still is required to allow builders to develop apartments. The litigation took years and the town ultimately lost. They blew millions on that, for a much smaller proposed complex than 750 Walnut. Which is just hilarious, way to go Cranford.

The law does not work in towns' favor with affordable housing. Towns are being forced to build to meet their AH requirements, but entire complexes don't need to be AH, I think only 20%, so more building of non-AH units means we need even MORE AH units, and allows builders to keep railroading us into more and more properties.

Hartz has not proven that the office space complex is obsolete. Some in Cranford think they have not done their due diligence to find more companies to fill the space. Why would they when they know they can win in court and force housing? Currently, it isn't empty, at least it wasn't as of the summer.

Hartz is not "smarter." They just know that the law is on their side and that they can force towns into compliance no matter the social cost. HM has produced studies that are questionable at best, like severely low estimates on the # of students who will be added to the south side schools with their nearly 1000 unit with 2-3 bedrooms complex. Residents are interested in finding a lawyer and help conduct our own studies to counteract theirs. They also produced a traffic study that made us LOL last summer.

We KNOW that adding 1000+ people will put a massive strain on local services and roads, in addition to mass transit. Hartz is not smarter than us. We know our town, what development in the area has done so far, and what it will continue to do. In addition to the 750 Walnut property, there are more proposed developments for North Avenue in Garwood along the Cranford border, which has a massive property that used to be (and maybe still is for the moment?) a factory type of commercial building. Westfield just built a big apartment complex downtown on South Avenue, close to the train station. It's not as if 750 Walnut is the first, one and only, and we are fighting it because we don't want any.

Cranford has built the South Avenue/High Street Riverfront complex recently, and the Woodmont Station complex way down South Avenue, nearly in Roselle. A lot on Centennial was just razed to build apartments (we have no clue where the new residents will park btw - I guess side streets where residents of the homes in the neighborhood already park? Or the parking spaces on the street that are meant for those going to the businesses along that block of Centennial?), and more apartments are going up further down Centennial just before Lincoln Ave. Even more proposed units were set to replace what used to be a single family home further down Centennial, that was a business that burned down about 10 years ago or so. But I think the town rejected that proposal - for now. Birchwood will be going up with a few hundred units. They're knocking down 4 houses further down Walnut Avenue, downtown, to build apartments. There has already been so much development and we are seeing increased traffic on the main roads and crowded schools, and the train station parking waitlist is already years long. Enough is enough, when will it end? CAN it end? When will homeowners in town, taxpayers who have invested in property and laid roots more permanent than renters in these apartments, have a say and when will our concerns be considered?

Cranford has a booming housing market right now for sellers, homes are being snatched in days. Why can't we build single family homes on the 750 Walnut property, creating a new neighborhood, and convert some existing areas elsewhere in town into AH units to comply? Developing massive apartment complexes where people don't currently live is not the only option. We don't NEED these huge apartment buildings. Other smaller apartment complexes are going up in town, those could all be AH. But ultimately it's about what is most profitable for Hartz, they don't care about the welfare of the towns.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-13-2018, 12:23 PM
 
252 posts, read 452,053 times
Reputation: 262
New Jersey's office market is saturated with vacant space, much of it - including 1960s-era 750 Walnut - obsolete and unusable as modern office space. While office vacancy stands at 20% across New Jersey, the vacancy rate for apartments and industrial space is less than 5%. These dynamics will continue to drive real estate development in New Jersey.

Cranford has several options.

1) No change to zoning. In Cranford, C-3 zoning governs what is built at 750 Walnut. C-3 zoning permits "warehouse distribution uses," and several trucking companies currently use the land and buildings at 750 Walnut for warehouse distribution. Hartz owns 19 million square feet of warehouse space in New Jersey and would be capable of redeveloping 750 Walnut into a large-scale, state-of-the-art warehouse building.

2) Acquire the building from Hartz. I estimate this would cost between $20 million and $30 million while eliminating more than $1 million of annual property tax payments.

3) Negotiate an agreement with Hartz, costing Cranford several million dollars in professional fees, in which the land is rezoned to residential and Hartz builds several hundred apartment units.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:




Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top