A application for a 35 year tax abatement for a few properties on Pine street is heading back again for a second try for reconsideration at the planning board. It was voted down last meeting the Yated Lakewood section reported, the next meeting is scheduled for April 5. The Lakewood township committee already approved the first reading of the ordinance to amend the cedarbridge redevelopment plan and the 2nd reading is scheduled for April 7th township meeting which will be held remotely. Regardless of what happens at the planning board the committee can still approve it even if the Planning board reject it again. Several planning board members mentioned the heavy opposition to the tax abatements according to the minutes of the meeting see below. The ordnance says that the parcels at "block 855.01 Lots 19 & 26.01 are in the non-condemnation area in need of redevelopment". That area is now the hottest real estate in Lakwwood and has been built up. See Agenda at the planning board HERE
CORRESPONDENCE & ORDINANCES Committee Resolution 2022-137 & Ordinance 2022-015 – Amendment to the Cedarbridge Redevelopment Plan to include Block 855.01 Lots 19 & 26.01 in the non-condemnation area in need of redevelopment.
Minutes of the meeting Planning Board
I think quick check, the office next to it, the office on New Hampshire at entrance to public works and while we are at it I think the mall at Marcys should all receive 30 years abatements as they are also located on he border of Cedarbridge....
ReplyDeleteMarcys mall has a 35 year abatements
DeleteRetail doesn't bring jobs, retail is a few lower paying jobs across lots of square footage. Offices on the other hand bring lots of jobs per square foot. But while we're at it, I think those lots should pay 3.5% sales taxes too.
DeleteIt's unbelievable that this property owner is making the claim that "the area [his lots are situated in] is in need of redevelopment".
ReplyDeleteThat classification is only applicable to a run-down underdeveloped property that will not get developed without receiving a huge tax-payor funded incentive. This entire area and these parcels, however, are clearly located in a prime area and need no such big giveaways of our tax money.
This is beside the fact that property tax abatements are only granted BEFORE a building is constructed (to incentive the construction). But 1515 Pine St. is already fully built and being marketed as ready to occupy in just 3 months. Does anybody really believe that if the CEO (Cedarbridge Expansion Ordinance) is voted down that he'll knock his brand-new building down??
The only major item still left to complete is the paving of the township owned portion of the OEM/EMS lot for the exclusive use of the private building's tenants. The agreement which was signed by Ray Coles with the developer AK in February 2021 does permit the public to park on those 48 parking spots -- But only during hours when the building "is not in operation". The owner of the building, in his sole determination, has complete control when those operating hours will be. This deal gives him a parking easement FOREVER, even though the parcel will still be owned by the township, and he will never get a property tax bill for it. He received a steal of a deal on that agreement also, as he only had to pay a one-time fee of just 5 thousand dollars.
The township already gave the CEO applicant enough with all the free parking spots on OEM lot 17 and the other 18 spots on undeveloped America Avenue they vacated for him. The point has come where this developer is just too greedy for us.
DeleteHe should not be allowed to take EVERYTHING away from us!
35 year no taxes. then they rip it down & rebuild it, with a new abbatement.
ReplyDeleteHow many properties are 35 years old round here? tThe need changes every few years. All this means is we the taxpayer subsidise big business, as if our taxes aren't high enough. What is the Hava amina?
Again the comitte in cohoots with big corporation to rip off all the small homeowners in the name of, bringing jobs to town?
We are getting fleeced, and our committeemen are the enablers. How much more shtick is going on that we don't even know about? I worked damn hard to earn a living and pay my property tax bill. But these goons keep letting every connected individual dip into the public coffers and grab a handful of dollars for themselves.
ReplyDeleteFirst, they give themselves huge unjustified raises. Then there's their free lifetime health insurance benefits they voted for us to pay for. At least until now, we all had to chip in equally to pay for all this nonsense. But now, they want to give a 35-year property tax break and accept a miniscule "payment-in-lieu-of" instead!!
This means that each of us now must pay more for all these new expenses so we can subsidize a guy that has already built himself a class A building. What a chutzpah!
I wonder if I would've put up the building on those lots, if the committee would grant me the same "favor". We all know the answer.
Complain, complain, complain. Until you will actually vote out the committee members, they will just keep doing these things. And giving themselves raises etc. Laughing at all of us.
ReplyDeleteThe committee knows that this is a hot potato. They don't want to take the blame for this shenanigan. They need to point their fingers and redirect the public's anger at the naive planning board members by making this come back for a second vote. They can then claim that they're only following the recommendation of the planning board, blah blah blah..
DeleteThey get raises in the MUA and township before certain applications come up
ReplyDeleteUnless something radical like recurring protests are going to be
ReplyDeleteunlikely to ever get enough of votes
The zoning board has said many times the lots in east spruce street may not open to pine st. somehow this developer managed to do that anyway.
ReplyDeleteHe did it in incremental stages.
DeleteFirst, he convinced the zoning board to let him get him a Use Variance in the R-20 zone and push his mixed-use Spruce Care Daycare (which is a permitted use) & commercial office (which is an illegal use) building to the back of the East Spruce lot. Then he came back to get rid of the daycare and turn the entire building into commercial offices. He then flipped the front of the building around to face Pine St. and even changed the official address from 1459 East Spruce St. to 1515 Pine St. He also got the committee to give him an easement for 48 free parking spots (on a portion of the OEM/EMS lot 17) for his “exclusive use during his building's hours of operation" between his building on lot 26.01 and Pine St. (He paid the astronomical one-time fee of just five thousand dollars for that agreement!) This way he can try to claim that he's only across the street from the Cedarbridge Campus - as he now has artificial "frontage" on Pine St.
And that's not even half of the story. There's more coming out..
Subdived the back half of property against rules because it doesn't front on a street.
DeleteYou guys are bitter, why can't you fargin the developer saving $30,000 a year in taxes? It adds up, with taxes constantly rising that's likely we'll over a million dollars.
ReplyDeleteThe money the developer saves in taxes is our money. The building is up already so he doesn't need a tax incentive. The taxes go to run our town. If the town doesn't need the money, reduce the property taxes of the little guys in town. I am all for business and giving businesses incentives. But that's not the case here.
DeleteIf this guy wants to get the CEO so he be the beneficiary of the Cedarbridge zone benefits, then he should purchase a lot within that area and develop it. He cannot buy a lot nearby that area and try to qualify.
DeleteYou’re either inside the zone or outside, and he is clearly outside. He should be treated no differently than the rest of us with commercial buildings which are outside.
Make sure you make your voice heard by the meeting, as the applicants are quick to point out he lack of visual opposition. If you cant spare the time to come out , than don't complain
ReplyDeleteThe Committee is still hiding behind their video screens and phone lines. They're refusing to hold in-person meetings even though everyone else is.
DeleteThey hide their faces, no idea if they are actually voting just a bunch of anonymous 'yes' votes
DeleteThe April 5th Agenda has now been updated on the township’s homepage to the correct version, and it shows the CEO on the schedule for the Board’s reconsideration.
ReplyDeleteThe following Planning Board members should be very careful not to betray their duty to the residents of this town. Stop giving everything and the kitchen sink to a greedy developer that is asking for what he is not entitled to (no matter what kind of garbage claims he puts in the so-called "report" he paid for).
DeleteThe residents are paying attention. We will be watching. Don't break the bank. Vote NO to the CEO.
Moshe Neiman
Justin Flancbaum
Bruce Stern
Moshe Raitzik
Eli Rennert
Jacob Meyer
Dovid Helmreich
Yair Stern
Shlomo Pichey
Who was the individual that made the decision to allow this proposed tax abatement ordinance to come back a second time for reconsideration? After all, the Board already voted it down last time?
ReplyDeleteNotice how the township had the draft without the ordinance and now put it on since it became public
ReplyDeletetownship committee, the planning board and zoning board members shouldn't be counted for minyan. gozlei horabim.
ReplyDeleteI also need some protektzia to erase my property taxes. Can I also pay someone to write a dummy report for me and get the committee to write a special ordinance granting me exclusive Cedarbridge benefits?
ReplyDeleteExperience shows us that the worst governments had some measure of public support in the really in the really. That is until a significant section of courageous citizens willing to take to the streets and do whatever it takes
ReplyDeleteProblem remains,many of the public LIKE corruption as long as they can
Hope to finagle some peripheral benefit
The board attorney Jackson was wrong when he stated that the issue is whether it is consistent with the Master Plan. That has absolutely nothing to do with getting an abatement. Without the abatement, it is equally consistent with the master plan
ReplyDeleteThe sole issue is whether an abatement will allow a property that is neglected to be developed.
The answer is no. There is no debate about that. Not only is it already built, but even if it wasn't, that land is prime location for residential and commercial.
The only purpose to add this to the Pilot program, is to hand money, Township Residents money, to a wealthy developer. There is no justification for this
Thank you for explaining this.
DeleteThere is another important omission (among the many) in the "Investigative Report" the developer paid for. It states in the concluding paragraph on page 17 that the only other alternative use for the property is residential. It then goes on to give some ridiculous explanation why it’s not viable for the developer to make money that way.
However, what the Report deliberately fails to mention is that the developer already received approvals from the Zoning Board in 2020 to construct a “Spruce Care” (as the parcel's original address was on East Spruce St.) daycare business.
We all know that daycares are a thriving industry in our town, although they are highly regulated. But the owner/developer wasn't content with putting in a good day's work to earn his profits. He prefers to make easy money with a commercial class A office building which comes with very low maintenance efforts. So, he went back to the Zoning Board in 2021 and received a special Use Variance to eliminate the daycare and just build commercial offices. He could’ve just stuck to being happy with his original approvals. Instead, he now comes and claims entitlement to receive Cedarbridge Park designation and 35 years of no property taxes.
Additionally, the purported difficulty that he claims (on page 17) in building residential on a lot surrounded (although by quite a distance) by a school and the OEM building is a DIRECT RESULT OF HIS OWN DOING when he requested the Zoning Board to push his proposed building on the Spruce St. lot all the way to the back, closer to Pine St.
This is a classic case of a self-created hardship which should never be rewarded by the taxpayers!
The so-called developer's Report tries hard to make a very unconvincing argument that redesignating these developer's lots as part of the Cedarbridge zone will be an ADVANTAGE for both the developer and the township of Lakewood. Apparently, it tells only half a lie!
ReplyDeleteVote NO to the CEO!!
ReplyDeleteTonight, April 5th, the Planning board secretary announced that the Committee requested the board to table the scheduled reconsideration of the CEO.
ReplyDeleteInterestingly, the Committee's agenda for this Thursday, April 7th, still shows a scheduled second reading of Ord. 2022-015 - also now famously known as the CEO.
The CEO died at second reading for lack of motion. But Mayor Coles said that they might reintroduce it again later.
ReplyDeleteSee Twp Committee meeting on video at minutes 15:04 – 23:41 at https://www.townhallstreams.com/stream.php?location_id=88&id=42469
Delete