“Candidates want
Development Czar” Underneath this bold Headline which was spread across the
top of the front page of Tuesday’s Courier was an article not written by
Plainfield’s personal reporter. Mark Spivey, that indicated that all four
candidates on November’s ballot recognized the need for an “in charge person”
to try to restore Plainfield’s commercial and residential desirability.
There is a Division of Economic Development as a unit of the
Department of Public Works and Urban Development. On the City’s site its
description reads: “The Economic
Development Office's major responsibility is to plan, direct and implement
economic development activities within the City of Plainfield. This office
provides technical assistance to developers and business owners located or
intending to locate in the City of Plainfield.
The Office of Economic Development also administers the City's Enterprise Zone Program.”
The Office of Economic Development also administers the City's Enterprise Zone Program.”
The one project featured on the Division’s site is the
“Monarch”! Bravo!! What an asset that has been. There is still litigation about costs claimed due on the Senior Citizen's Center, and the status of the Veterans' unit occupancy.
There is no question that after the departure of Pat.
Ballard-Fox in the early days of this present administration that Economic
Development has been a rudderless ship.
Eight years of nothing may have been the death blow to this
community which has had serious changes in its demographics over the past 4
decades. The once substantial affluent white population had given way to an
overwhelming African-American majority which has been unwilling to accommodate
in its governance the now 40% Hispanic population. There still remains a small
core of committed integrated white residents,
It will take a professional similar to Ballard-Fox to
revitalize the two potential transit villages, the central business area and
the West End Corridor. Separately the Muhlenberg property has to be turned into
an asset preferably with a health care core. Hopefully that will include a for
profit hospital although that is farfetched; but will never happen in the
absence of an aggressive Economic Development Division.
To be successful there will have to be gentrification of the
nearby railroad station localities. That will only be possible` if it accompanied
with upscale small business and restaurants in the neighborhoods.
The term Czar connotes a person with a free hand. We know that
is not possible; however with a go getter in charge and a supportive Council
the rebirth is possible long before that one ride to the City becomes a
reality.
I wouldn't hold my breath for those upscale restaurants etc...they would want to serve alcohol ( fire water for Sister Holier Than Though Bill Reid ) as well as most people with money who WANT to open a business are not accustomed to begging, jumping through hoops simply to be made to jump through more and deal with an indecisive, passive aggressive government that couldn't decide to put itself out if it were on fire.
ReplyDeleteAnd news flash people... SHARON IS NOT THE GOVERNMENT in Plainfield. When she is gone all the players will basically be the same.
The only pro-business attitude there is in this city is no need to follow codes and zoning laws downtown ( those home owners with uneven side walks could only wish for such a blind eye ).
After paying for taxis to visit doctors and dentists who used to be in Plainfield, I feel that economic development must include local availability of medical and dental care. I now have to go to South Plainfield, North Edison and Summit for visits I used to be able to make on foot on "Doctors' Row" in Plainfield.
ReplyDeleteWhat contribution did Ballard Fox actually make?
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteDuring my tenure we completed :
• Tepper’s Redevelopment Area – Mixed Use Redevelopment
• Park Madison Redevelopment Area – Union County West office Building, Parking Garage & Retail Strip (not all aspects finished per UCIA – i.e. several redevelopment agreement & Planning Board stipulations)
• Scattered Site new Housing Construction –through the 197 City-Owned Property Redevelopment Plan (about 25-30 new homes built). Some sites for Faith, Bricks & Mortar and Habitat for Humanity. Other sites identified for open spaces etc)
• Applied for and received more than $13,000,000 in competitive grants for --- Tepper’s redevelopment (HUD grant w/ Lautenberg support;) Roads & sewers (North Ave Industrial Corridor- USEDA), Streetscapes - South Ave –( extra funding & completed project that languished)& Downtown Streetscape), planning (various Redevelopment Plans (North Ave, Macy’s block, Marino’s, Downtown Station South, Industrial Corridor Plan); Redevelopment legal advice & drafting of agreements, Brownfield’s site analysis and remediation (S. Second Street site – proposed new Middle & startup of the EPA Pilot Project for various properties )
• Built two phases of underground conduit (through streetscapes) to carry dark fiber to service data needs to attract businesses. Third phase & final links not completed under current administration.
• Set up Special Improvement District (Downtown & South Ave)
• Initiated Kean University Small Business Development Center Satellite
• Developed new ED marketing materials – Multi-Section City Brochure developed by Plainfield business; Home Arts Brochure, Restaurant Brochure
• Hired Marketing & Events Planning consultant to do above work
• Initiated several rounds of Sign & Façade grant programs for UEZ certified retail businesses
Several major projects we had developed but Council rejected were:
• Execution of redevelopment agreement with award-winning developer for the downtown block of North Ave to restore historic properties and build new compatible structures on lots not in historic district
• Execution of redevelopment agreement with developer for supermarket-anchored shopping center at Marino’s redevelopment site (This developer did the high end condo/retail project on North Ave in Garwood)
o These two proposals were rejected by one very vocal councilman who said – “There will be no more redevelopment in this town unless it’s done by minorities, particularly black minorities”. The others didn’t object. To this day these sites are still marginally used and the historic theatre on North Ave had to be razed.
• Execution of an agreement with Clearview Cinema’s to develop a four-plex in the Strand Theatre and assist them with some UEZ funds. Rejected because there was a developer in the wings who wanted to build town houses in the public parking lot next to the theatre. A movie theatre or a department store is the best anchor tenant you can have in a downtown as they draw people. Still no townhouses and still no theatre.
•
We did lots more things with very few staff people including running the UEZ program, getting its territory expanded, using UEZ funds for a variety of projects.
Thank you Pat. I could not recall all that went down. You made my point.
ReplyDeleteNo offense Ms. Ballard Fox, but I have seen what you consider "achievements" and I'm sorry to disagree, but the downtown still looks like a slum. Teppers redevelopment that took at least 10 plus years gave us mixed retail use development which was the only idea that you seemed to have. And always, it turns into affordable housing units and junk stores. South Avenue is not doing well, in fact, we've lost the bakery, Freshwaters and Drug Fair and a family restaurant. Achievement? I think you pat yourself on the back too much. I for one am glad you are gone. NO one is better than you.
ReplyDeleteAll I did was list what we accomplished or attempted to initiate because someone asked. I never had the final say on what was to be implemented - that was the Council and I covered a few mega opportunities lost there. Those two redevelopments I mentioned would have generated about $1,000,000 in tax revenues and several hundred jobs - even that didn't get their attention.
ReplyDeleteI also haven't been there for 8 years so blame it on me? What about the tanking economy? I assume that you would have prefered to have a 150,000 sq ft commercial building which was vacant for 27 years and occupied by pigeons & bums to continue? At the time we did Teppers there were no other takers for the site except a assisted living project that wanted us to pay for everything. The housing was initially proposed for senior but the market study required by the state didn't show the demand thus it was chnaged to limited income restricted. Interestingly enough about 70% of the initial occupants of the building were seniors. Alot more would have been accomplished if there had been cooperation from the Council and less arguments with the Mayor. It's too bad that things have declined further. BTW -Freshwater's never felt supported by the locals -- most of their patrons were from out of town. Final point - mixed use development has been the preferred and most successful development strategy for towns and cities for years now -- housing and retail. Its everywhere. That's what cities were before suburbs!