patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

'Failed' Office Park Could Become Residences

Developer wants 'in need of rehabilitation' status to build multi-family residences; council members concerned about prospect of more rentals.

 

A developer wants to change the Inter Park office buildings behind the Blackthorn Irish Pub & Restaurant into a 287-unit multi-family residence development.

Representing Commercial Land Development Inc., attorney Joseph O’Neill was present at the Parsippany Town Council’s Thursday agenda meeting to request that the case be referred to the Planning Board so that either allowed uses for the property are expanded or the area is designated as being “in need of rehabilitation.”

Developer James Jones told the council that the site, which was readied for use in 2008, has not been leased for office use after four years of trying.

“Today, the project is considered to be a failure in the marketplace,” Jones said. “We have been told by brokers that it will not lease commercially in the forseeable future.”

O’Neill argued that one of the main reasons the office space has not leased is due to access to the site, complicated by the intersection of Vail Road and Route 46. However, he said the tough access could actually be a boon for a residential site.

“You can’t make a left turn [on Route 46] without driving all the way down to Baldwin Road and turning back around,” O’Neill said. “It’s negative for commercial but positive for residential because you don’t want a lot of traffic. Isolation makes it positive and very desirable for residential use.”

Although both men said there is no official plan yet—just suggested outlines that will allow them to present to the Planning Board—the project would call for 287 units across two buildings. The buildings would consist of a three-acre structure that already exists and a nearly four-acre site that is currently just foundation.

Council members agreed that the current office space project has been unsuccessful. Councilman Jonathan Nelson deemed it “the biggest failure in Parsippany.”

However, most of the members expressed numerous concerns.

Council member Michael dePierro questioned exactly what type of residential units would be there, saying he would look more favorably upon condominiums than rental units.

“We have 7,000 rental units in Parsippany already,” dePierro said. “I don’t want rental units in Parsippany anymore.”

Councilman Paul Carifi Jr. agreed and asked if there is a market for people to purchase housing units.

“In Morris County today, there is a considerable demand for multi-family housing, both rental and for sale,” Jones said, explaining that there was only a four percent vacancy in multi-family housing the last time he checked.

DePierro said he was concerned because the Planning Board cannot legally dictate that the units be condominiums instead of rentals.

While concurring, Township Attorney John Inglesino advised that the town can retain some control by deeming the area “in need of rehabilitation.” Parsippany can then enact a redevelopment plan that can be specific about various facets of the project, such as fixtures and furnishings, that would represent a for-sale product instead of a rental.

“The developer would have to expend so much money on developing the plan, they couldn’t charge a high enough rent,” Inglesino said. “They’d have to sell the units.”

O’Neill explained that the developer had not decided whether the units would be rented or sold. He said that matter would be open for discussion with the Planning Board.

Council members also expressed concern over Jones’ tax revenue claims. Jones explained that the vacant property currently generates an “unsustainable position” of $183,963 a year in revenue for Parsippany.

“If it were to be redeveloped using today’s values of about $285,000 per residential unit, it would generate tax revenues of approximately $1.325 million, which is an increase of about 621 percent over its current state,” Jones said.

However, both Nelson and dePierro argued that apartments and condominiums are taxed differently; therefore, it is difficult to make tax revenue claims without first making that distinction.

The other major concern raised was the density of the units.

“If you have 287 units per seven [total] acres, that comes to about 40 units per acre,” dePierro said. “We don’t have anything in Parsippany near that density.”

O’Neill and Jones explained the residences will all be either single bedrooms or studio apartments aimed at young professionals. Additionally, the units would be spread across five floors in one building and four floors in the other, with about 26 per floor and fewer on the ground floors.

In addition to the residences, both buildings would have subterranean parking that would reduce parking spots. Reducing paved areas, Jones said, would allow for more “green” and amenities, such as pools and fitness areas.

Before the council granted a referral to the Planning Board, O’Neill promised that he and Jones would think seriously about all of the concerns raised, especially regarding the choice between rental apartments or condominium units.

“We are asking for the opportunity to start the process and for the town to finally take this property off of the dead-letter section of the books and make it into a viable property,” he said.

Related Topics: Blackthorn, Parsippany Town Council, inner park, multi-family residence, parsippany planning board, and parsippany-troy hills town council

Kenneth Kaplan

8:15 am on Friday, January 4, 2013

Township Attorney John Inglesino advised that the town can retain some control by deeming the area “in need of rehabilitation.” Parsippany can then enact a redevelopment plan that can be specific about various facets of the project, such as fixtures and furnishings, that would represent a for-sale product instead of a rental....A perfect example of government distorting the market making housing less affordable to New Jersey residents. I certainly hope the Council does not follow this advice.

Reply

Harland

8:21 am on Friday, January 4, 2013

Also part of the developer's proposal is a recommendation to rename Parsippany as "Little Newark". The developer claims that this will bring an extra $1K in taxes to the township, to which Mayor Barberio said "Sign me up!"

Reply
Comment_arrow

Sick of the trolls

8:54 am on Friday, January 4, 2013

Harland, I invite you to go back to NJ.com with these types of posts. They do not add anything to the discussion, and are not wanted here.

Pete

9:18 am on Friday, January 4, 2013

Generally, rentals - especially high-density rentals - increase the load on a community's infrastructure, while NOT increasing tax revenues proportionately.

This location is a dead-end. Any potential renter or buyer who takes the time to drive around and see what the traffic patterns are like, will run, not walk, away. Unless, of course, they have no choice. Do I hear "Subsidized Housing" ???

Reply
Comment_arrow

Selene

11:21 pm on Friday, January 4, 2013

OMG, perhaps if the corporations in Parsippany paid the same level of taxes that the homeowners did we'd have a sh$tload of money to improve the township's infrastructure and schools.

Robert J Karasiewicz

9:36 am on Friday, January 4, 2013

The Township does not have to guarentee the developer a positive outcome.
The developer took
a chance and lost. Now it is his turn to eat his loss. We, the Township, should not be saddled with his foolishness.The developer has declared the building unsellable, Now the Township should condemm the building and make the developer tear it down and return the space to what it was. This will make the developers in town sit up and take notice/ There would be no more foolish projects

Reply
Comment_arrow

Harland

10:11 am on Friday, January 4, 2013

Robert,
Excellent point! Unfortunately, we're turning into a society that EXPECTS government bailouts every time someone makes a bad decision. We need to return to the concept of personal accountability.

Comment_arrow

clyde donovan

2:52 pm on Friday, January 4, 2013

I agree Robert, but we have to understand that certain developers own various government officials in Parsippany.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/02/parsippany_planning_board_atto.html

Comment_arrow

Sick of the trolls

3:17 pm on Friday, January 4, 2013

Again with the four year old news article that proves nothing "clyde"? Seriously, none of those people are even involved with Parsippany government anymore, who are you kidding? Is Teapot Dome proof that Obama's cabinet is corrupt as well? Do you have proof of current malfeasance or are you just spinning more of your crazy conspiracy theories?

DMHerinya

12:16 pm on Friday, January 4, 2013

I believe it's actually called "Inter Park". (Not Inner Park)
Here's the developer's website for it: http://www.interparknj.com/
The grounds are connected by a small footbridge from Veteran's Park and a walk back there a summer or two ago was interesting. The Phase 1 building was up and vacant, and nothing but a now fenced-off overgrown foundation at the location of phase 2. Kind of creepy-looking.
Another thought. I would think potential residents would not be fond of the constant Rt 80 traffic noise, as it is literally right next to it.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Kevin Guhl

6:11 pm on Friday, January 4, 2013

I fully expected to find a.) Sasquatch, b.) a secret government UFO testing facility or c.) the doorway to The Twilight Zone while walking back there, LOL. It was even creepier before Blackthorn had opened.

JFK

2:41 pm on Friday, January 4, 2013

Not one of the best location to have housing.......the noise from Route 80 will make any decent buyer run and hide......remember the Morris County Jail overlooks Route 287!!

Reply

Kevin

4:01 pm on Friday, January 4, 2013

I would hate to see what residences in that location would do to Veterans Park. That grass field in front of the bandstand barely survives the summer concerts. Imagine what would happen to it if people used it everyday for recreation.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Kevin Guhl

6:17 pm on Friday, January 4, 2013

Two-hundred-eighty-seven units (to subliminally evoke Rt. 287?) would not only trample the park, but would invite a huge traffic jam every morning entering on Rt. 46 East. And forget the turnaround at Baldwin to get onto Rt. 46 West, which can be difficult enough to cross during normal traffic. I'd be very surprised if this capacity got approved.

Comment_arrow

DMHerinya

6:45 pm on Friday, January 4, 2013

Kevin Guhl,
287 units (even if they provide parking for 2 cars per unit) is small change compared to the 763 parking spaces that were allotted to the office complex (according to the interparknj website).

Had the office park been successful, 763 potential vehicles during morning and evening rush hour would have been WAY worse than what's proposed. Only one entrance and exit. Yikes. Good luck trying to get to Blackthorne or the other business that shares the same entrance.

Either way (residential or office) sounds like a potential nightmare if/when occupied. Remember, this property is not connected to Veteran's park via roadway, only footbridge, so yea, only one entrance & exit to and from Rt 46 east.

Plus, I love the way the developer's attorney said “It’s negative for commercial but positive for residential..." Wow, if that isn't evidence of "poor planning" from the get-go, I don't know what is.

Comment_arrow

Selene

11:16 pm on Friday, January 4, 2013

OMG, people using a public park? The shame!!!!

Reality Checker

8:14 pm on Friday, January 4, 2013

I am with Harold and Robert on this and have no faith in the township leadership to do the right thing. The office building vacancy is supply and demand -- if they aren't rented then reduce the sq ft price until you get the units rented. This is the developers playing games to try to rezone the land with the usual greasing of the political wheel and put a spin that it will collect more tax dollars as the rest of Parsippany property values drop as Parsippany becomes a Dover, Paterson or Newark with rentals and stacking draining the tax base and reducing property values. We are looking to sell ASAP and get out of Parsippany because we have no faith in the local government doing the right thing for the current homeowners of Parsippany.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Sick of the trolls

8:41 am on Saturday, January 5, 2013

Oh, "Living in My Own" Reality Checker, we are gonna MISS you... like a bad case of the clap.

gina s.

8:53 pm on Friday, January 4, 2013

And how will we fit more kids into our already packed schools????

Reply
Comment_arrow

Selene

11:14 pm on Friday, January 4, 2013

How about we NOT vote for people like Christie who want to defund our educational programs? If you are a millionaire, your kids go to private schools, why should you care about public education? Get it?

Comment_arrow

Harland

9:32 am on Saturday, January 5, 2013

Hi Selene,
Rather than blame Christie, Parsippany could assume responsibility for its own situation and responsibly manage the population growth of our town through thoughtful planning and zoning control. Christie is not the problem - our issues are caused by the short-sighted local leaders who only see the quick tax dollars and fail to understand the long term costs the taxpayers will have to support as a result of these projects.

Nancy Choffo

10:25 pm on Friday, January 4, 2013

Sounds like a great place for the Whole Food/Target development!

Reply
Patch_comments_icon

Natalie Davis

11:52 pm on Friday, January 4, 2013

LOL! I've been waiting for someone to say that all day. Thank you, lovely Nancy!

Reply

Beachdudeca

2:28 am on Sunday, January 6, 2013

If not for the private homes on Patrician Court I could agree, but a busy commercial space in their backyard would be a bad idea.
A more perfect use for the space would be as a Senior Assisted Living Complex with units located where the two office buildings were to have been built, and wing that joins the two together in the middle that provides the complex with needed Services.
This means low traffic, no impact on the schools, and it provides a place for Seniors to live near their Parsippany adult children.

Reply

Leave a comment