Really glad to hear that Chris, any way you can share an estimated timeframe of when demolition will begin?
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Ferren Mall site (w/ renderings)
- Thread starter lawmatt78
- Start date
How many restaurants have survived being closed for an extended period of time? Clydz has to be worried. Btw, I liked Clydz better when the Clydes owned it. They now own Sergeanstville Inn btw.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
IMO, Clyde's was never in a very good (visible) location. If I was them, I'd jump at the opportunity to relocate to Makeda's former location (which I understand is now available), particularly if relocation assistance is to be provided. To have a trendy martini bar on the main drag, close to a hotel & the theater district has to be desirable.
Cydez always had a unique feel, but if you ever went there during a very busy time you would realize they could be getting even more business with a bigger bar area and overall space.
The rose pedals were always a nice touch.
The rose pedals were always a nice touch.
Will depend on their current levels of debt (if any) and if those payments can be turned off or refinanced when they are closed. Lots of variables in both directions. I wouldn't call it a death blow, but generally speaking, you are right. I wouldn't want to shut my doors for an extended period of time.
My understanding is that some companies carry insurance for interruption of business. I don't know, but maybe such insurance would cover in this situation.
Clydz would be better off moving into an existing location if possible, rather than closing for a year+ & trying to reestablish itself in the new building.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Clydz would be better off moving into an existing location if possible, rather than closing for a year+ & trying to reestablish itself in the new building.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Clydz has a space with some character. There are only so many of those. I'm definitely in favor of this project (assuming they don't F up the ground level), but you don't want a city to end up as nothing more than a collection of big projects. You need the small buildings, varied storefronts, adaptive re-use of older buildings., etc., for a number of reasons. Fortunately, given the size of this project, it isn't replacing very much that was interesting or worth saving. Ferren Mall, of course, was a monstrosity.
Not sure as to the "reason" or story - but pretty sure the Melody was, where the RWJ Plum Street Deck is now (French between Prospect and Plum).
across the street from there. It is now a vacant lot.
https://goo.gl/maps/mnYAl
https://www.flickr.com/photos/shaggy/2351406/in/set-59097
https://goo.gl/maps/mnYAl
https://www.flickr.com/photos/shaggy/2351406/in/set-59097
Hmm...
That is also a RWJ deck, and the building on the other side is the "New Brunswick Health Sciences Technology High School". Perhaps that has something to do with it...
I've attached a link to a New Brunswick Today article that sums up the majority of what has been discussed in this thread so far. I've also included some higher resolution shots of the site maps.
First Floor
Second Floor
New Brunswick Today
First Floor
Second Floor
New Brunswick Today
I'm sorry, but can this JO write any article without slanting it with his gotcha bias? It's really old, and it's sad, as he probably could make a good living for himself with that site if he had one iota of journalistic integrity.
I'm with you here. I'd much rather read articles written by someone who envisions himself as Charlie-For-Information instead of Charlie-For-Change.
Charlie is simply not a very good writer, or apparently very intelligent.
Aside from spelling and grammatical errors in that article, it generally lacks any direction. He meanders through a bunch of half criticisms, without every fully connecting the dots or explaining what is wrong. The only complete thought is the criticism that they listed the grocery store as a success, when in fact, it had gone out of business. Okay, but is outdated information on a single tenant really a big deal? He then goes into a discussion of Christie and JLL, which is a complete non-sequitir, and entirely irrelevant to the wisdom of the new Hub project.
The remaining criticism is apparently the fact that Devco is advertising for tenants, even though the project might not pan out. Seems like a fundamental failure to understand development, or any business in general. Developers advertise for tenants. If they come, the project gets built. If they don't it fails. I would like to see his ideal real estate brochure. I guess something along the lines of: "Look, this will probably never happen, just like the theater project we tried a few years back, but if you want to get in some real estate space, give us a call. By the way, we don't own the entire project site, but we are working on it."
Aside from spelling and grammatical errors in that article, it generally lacks any direction. He meanders through a bunch of half criticisms, without every fully connecting the dots or explaining what is wrong. The only complete thought is the criticism that they listed the grocery store as a success, when in fact, it had gone out of business. Okay, but is outdated information on a single tenant really a big deal? He then goes into a discussion of Christie and JLL, which is a complete non-sequitir, and entirely irrelevant to the wisdom of the new Hub project.
The remaining criticism is apparently the fact that Devco is advertising for tenants, even though the project might not pan out. Seems like a fundamental failure to understand development, or any business in general. Developers advertise for tenants. If they come, the project gets built. If they don't it fails. I would like to see his ideal real estate brochure. I guess something along the lines of: "Look, this will probably never happen, just like the theater project we tried a few years back, but if you want to get in some real estate space, give us a call. By the way, we don't own the entire project site, but we are working on it."
The thing that baffles me about the entire design is why you would have the primary courtyard area facing and opening toward Kirkpatrick street, as opposed to the primary pedestrian corridor at the intersection of Easton and Albany.
The 2 primary buildings, with their appearance of curtains being pulled back on Albany Street, look inviting from an aerial view, and will likely translate well to the train platforms. However, I fear that from street level, the appearance will be lost, as you will simply be too close to the very large structures. With the overhangs, the entrance from Albany Street to the courtyard does not appear to be very large. Also, due to the angles of the buildings, there is an appearance in the rendering that the courtyard slants away from George Street. If a pedestrian was not already going to one of the businesses on the site, there would be no reason to venture in.
I would think a primary goal of the project would be to encourage pedestrians coming from the train station or from campus (down Easton) to walk through the courtyard and down Paterson Street to access downtown NB, thereby gaining exposure for the project's ground level retail. A narrow entrance to a courtyard that appears to slant away from George Street will not accomplish that goal. Rather than venturing in, pedestrians will continue to simply walk down Albany to George, or cut through on Spring Street.
Since there is no reason for anyone to walk down Kirkpatrick unless they were already going to the site, the courtyard on Kirkpatrick is lost space from a public point of view, and is likely to be used only by tenants. Kirkpatrick is not a pedestrian corridor, and likely receives minimal foot traffic. This project will not change that, as there is no destination on Kirkpatrick Street. Indeed, there are not even any entrances to the Wellness Center along Kirkpatrick, except at the corners. That is an area that should be more intensely developed, perhaps even creating a full siding with service entrances to mirror the Wellness Center. That is always going to be an alley of sorts. More square footage there would allow for the project to be "opened" toward Albany Street.
The 2 primary buildings, with their appearance of curtains being pulled back on Albany Street, look inviting from an aerial view, and will likely translate well to the train platforms. However, I fear that from street level, the appearance will be lost, as you will simply be too close to the very large structures. With the overhangs, the entrance from Albany Street to the courtyard does not appear to be very large. Also, due to the angles of the buildings, there is an appearance in the rendering that the courtyard slants away from George Street. If a pedestrian was not already going to one of the businesses on the site, there would be no reason to venture in.
I would think a primary goal of the project would be to encourage pedestrians coming from the train station or from campus (down Easton) to walk through the courtyard and down Paterson Street to access downtown NB, thereby gaining exposure for the project's ground level retail. A narrow entrance to a courtyard that appears to slant away from George Street will not accomplish that goal. Rather than venturing in, pedestrians will continue to simply walk down Albany to George, or cut through on Spring Street.
Since there is no reason for anyone to walk down Kirkpatrick unless they were already going to the site, the courtyard on Kirkpatrick is lost space from a public point of view, and is likely to be used only by tenants. Kirkpatrick is not a pedestrian corridor, and likely receives minimal foot traffic. This project will not change that, as there is no destination on Kirkpatrick Street. Indeed, there are not even any entrances to the Wellness Center along Kirkpatrick, except at the corners. That is an area that should be more intensely developed, perhaps even creating a full siding with service entrances to mirror the Wellness Center. That is always going to be an alley of sorts. More square footage there would allow for the project to be "opened" toward Albany Street.
Cabbagehead,
I share your concerns about the design. The public space should be more inviting and visible from the main street / intersection and train station. It almost seems like they are trying to hide it - or trying to discourage people from venturing in.
I share your concerns about the design. The public space should be more inviting and visible from the main street / intersection and train station. It almost seems like they are trying to hide it - or trying to discourage people from venturing in.
Exactly, and it makes no sense for the developer if they want retail. They have a golden opportunity with that site to re-route virtually all foot traffic from the train station or from the college through their courtyard to downtown New Brunswick, and they are missing it. Its actually quite astounding.
If they don't want a courtyard, I get it -- I understand developers seeking maximum density. But if the goal is to create a public space that will benefit the retail tenants, then this design is a profound failure. The flow created by this plan has the appearance of moving from the corner of Spring and Albany toward the corner of Kirkpatrick and Paterson. That is reverse of the way all pedestrians are trying to go. If it looks like it is more cumbersome to walk though, pedestrians will simply continue to use Spring Street to reach downtown. Pedestrian flow is entirely from the end of Easton toward George Street (via the corner of Spring and Paterson). If they made it inviting in that direction, it would become an impressive town center, almost a gateway to downtown, which would be highly appealing to tenants of all kinds (retail and office). Per the current plan, it is just an impressive building - the public space component fails to deliver anything of use.
This post was edited on 4/7 1:25 PM by Ole Cabbagehead
Am I the only one who sees the big courtyard walkway connecting to the sidewalks on Easton and running into the property?
I think Cabbagehead's point is that from the Albany/Easton area, the walkway just looks like a walkway between tall buildings, There is no glimpse of the public courtyard area to the right.
Also, for someone standing at the Albany St side, looking to head to the George/Paterson area, the walkway would look like it angles to the right, when you want to go to the left. Therefore pedestrians would be inclined to walk down Albany St to George St, rather than to walk through this property toward Paterson. This would reduce the amount of pedestrian traffic here needed to support any retail.
I look at this and think what could have been...Originally posted by RUseaweed:
Second Floor
I see a transit hub close by, room for parking ( + Courthouse Lots not used at night and on weekends), short walk from CAC and potential for growth AROUND the area for could have been built here.
2 Qs and a comment:
1.Is the above pic from the perspective of someone standing at the fountain looking toward Bayard st.?
2. Will the NYC bus stop continue to be located in front of this new building, at the end of easton ave.?
-i believe that a path thru the complex that continues on the line of easton ave, angled towards George st (with a fork that leads to Patterson st) would be extremely advantageous to pedestrians and merchants in the complex. imagine a lowercase 'y'backwards.
1.Is the above pic from the perspective of someone standing at the fountain looking toward Bayard st.?
2. Will the NYC bus stop continue to be located in front of this new building, at the end of easton ave.?
-i believe that a path thru the complex that continues on the line of easton ave, angled towards George st (with a fork that leads to Patterson st) would be extremely advantageous to pedestrians and merchants in the complex. imagine a lowercase 'y'backwards.
Originally posted by Cofifa:
here are some pedestrian level renderings I thought I would share with you guys
This looks terrific. What a great addition to New Brunswick.
THERE ARE TWO PERSPECTIVES. THE BOTTOM PERSPECTIVE is standing at the corner of Easton and Albany at the train station looking toward the interior walkway with the two office building at the front of the site. Those two building will have office lobbies and retail on the ground floor. hopefully we will attract retailers on the Albany street frontage that take two floors (H&M, Urban outfitters) maybe two story restaurant etc.
The second perspective is in the walkway. It is programmed to be 80 feet wide with some covered portions , so it is very wide. between the four buildings that anchor essentaily the corners of the property(two office and two residential) the connecting buildings are lower rise (3-4 story) residential which will allow for us to diversify the housing options (condos, rentals, affordable and market)
As for adding the second pedestrian street, that is a solid suggestion its viability will be driven by the types of floor plates that the office and lab components demand.
We appreciate the comments and suggestions, even the cynics......
The second perspective is in the walkway. It is programmed to be 80 feet wide with some covered portions , so it is very wide. between the four buildings that anchor essentaily the corners of the property(two office and two residential) the connecting buildings are lower rise (3-4 story) residential which will allow for us to diversify the housing options (condos, rentals, affordable and market)
As for adding the second pedestrian street, that is a solid suggestion its viability will be driven by the types of floor plates that the office and lab components demand.
We appreciate the comments and suggestions, even the cynics......
