April 13
...serving up your daily dish.
Have you been wondering what's holding up reconstruction of the Upper Montclair Train Station, destroyed in a blaze February 5? Apparently, repairs are being held up because the town can't figure out just how much the station was insured for. From the Montclair Times:
Nearly three months after a fire severely damaged the Upper Montclair Train Station, restoration is slightly further down the tracks.
Before developers can be contracted and blueprints approved, the municipality must determine the amount for which the historic building was insured.
“Our understanding is the [municipality’s] carrier agreed to provide coverage, and they are working out the details,” NJ Transit spokesperson Penny Bassett-Hackett said.
A Reconstruction Task Force will be meeting for the next six months to consider options for the historic site, most recently occupied by restaurant Round Trip Fare. Not that they asked for our opinion, but what would you like to see at the rebuilt station ?
April 13, 2006 in Current Affairs | Permalink
i don't understand how the town and their insurance company don't know what the structure was insured for. how is that possible.
how can the montclair times say it's been nearly 3 months. it's been 9 weeks.
great reporting and great math- not! who is responsible for contracting for insurance on town properties. why wasn't that person or committee interviewed?
Posted by: pissant | Apr 13, 2006 9:26:38 AM
In the spirit of Depot Square down at Walnut Street station, I can imagine a long, narrow bar space with floor-to-ceiling plate glass windows in both directions (trackside and parkingside). Bistro tables and bar stool seating for 30-40 would be good. For morning commuters, coffee and tea and bagels and muffins would be available. In the evening, full bar service and light tapas would be available. Simple and location-appropriate.
Posted by: Jim | Apr 13, 2006 9:28:06 AM
How about a little shelter (a roof with not much more) from the weather for people waiting for the train and a place to buy tickets. Any money leftover could go to pay for something else useful. I see no reason to build space for a restaurant unless it would pay sufficient rent to offset its cost in a fairly short amount of time.
Posted by: Max | Apr 13, 2006 9:40:15 AM
Just a thought on the insurance question. I would guess the property was covered in some kind of blanket policy on all town property, without any specific assignment of "value" to each property. If so, the discussion would now be about the value of the station.
Posted by: Byron | Apr 13, 2006 10:07:03 AM
Incidentally, it's a perfect location for a restaurant, with available evening parking, movie across street. Surprised some enterprising restauranteur hasn't come forth.
Posted by: Byron | Apr 13, 2006 10:11:22 AM
This was a beautiful train station, a prototype in its era. I'd like it to be restored to its Victorian splendor.
Posted by: rudebuddha | Apr 13, 2006 10:11:22 AM
"Incidentally, it's a perfect location for a restaurant, with available evening parking, movie across street. Surprised some enterprising restauranteur hasn't come forth."
Posted by: Byron | Apr 13, 2006 10:11:22 AM
It WAS a restaurant, and they burned it down.
Posted by: rudebuddha | Apr 13, 2006 10:12:48 AM
The insurance company knows what the facility is insured for. The town isn't talking.
Posted by: lasermike026 | Apr 13, 2006 10:19:57 AM
Mountain View has a nice reproduction Victorian era station.
Built in 1996, I believe.
(I wonder if the town is getting appraisals on Mountain Ave station, Watchung, Walnut, etc? I believe NJT owns Bay Street station.)
Posted by: Rail Paul | Apr 13, 2006 10:34:52 AM
>>How do you know?
Insurance companies are in business to make money. Do you really think they would forget the details of an insurance policy they are responsible for? I think not.
If the insurance company doesn't know how much coverage there is for an insurance policy they are responsible for, they have bigger problems than the pay out. I think its more likely the town is trying to hide something than the insurance company doesn't know the details of the policy.
Posted by: lasermike026 | Apr 13, 2006 11:22:31 AM
Laser, do you always immediately segue from ignorance to claims of cover-up and fraud?
Please stop and think: when your insurance company covers all your property and your gold watch is stolen, do you think they know what the value of the watch was without making some investigation. The policy would not likely have a specific value set for each item of property covered. There may be riders for specific high value items....e.g. furs, jewelry etc.
Posted by: Byron | Apr 13, 2006 11:34:23 AM
laser,
Does the town self-insure? Does it buy municipal insurance for public property via a state self-insurance pool? Does the town, as Byron posits, buy a blanket insurance policy for ALL town property?
You know nothing about this circumstance yet pronounce "facts".
I am reminded of a Spanish proverb:
"Don't speak unless you can improve on the silence"
Posted by: Right of Center™ | Apr 13, 2006 11:34:49 AM
p.s.
"I think its more likely the town is trying to hide something than the insurance company doesn't know the details of the policy."
and therein lies the modus operandi of the modern lefty conspiracist. No information? Don't understand something? Conspiracy!
Posted by: Right of Center™ | Apr 13, 2006 11:37:49 AM
Laser, do you always immediately segue from ignorance to charges of fraud and cover-up?
The town probably has a several million dollar fire policy on all its properties, not individual policies on each parcel. There would be no assignment of value on each property.
For example,(for your consumerist mind),if you have a policy on all your personal property and your watch is stolen, the insurer would have no information on the value of the watch without making an investigation and you would have no information on how much would be allowed until you and the insurer had discussed it.
Posted by: Byron | Apr 13, 2006 11:47:07 AM
They could be arguing over a technicality on payout and how much was covered?
What was the cause of the fire?
That could also be a determination of payout.
And since everyone's chiming in with what they want to see, how about graffiti proof walls in tudor style to match Charlie Brown's.
Posted by: Shitalker | Apr 13, 2006 11:49:40 AM
I don't think it would take me 9 weeks to discuss the value of my watch with my insurance company. I would know what amount it had been insured for.
I'm not saying that it's a conspiracy but the silence and claim of lack of knowledge as to how much the property was insured for makes me wonder.
Posted by: badd_patti | Apr 13, 2006 11:51:57 AM
it took me 4 weeks to get the insurance company for the (other) driver "at fault" to "agree". (another 2 weeks for the payout).
I have a medical claim I have been fighting for over a year.
Posted by: Right of Center™ | Apr 13, 2006 11:55:23 AM
I wonder what the trees in Woodman field are insured for? Hmmm...
Posted by: walleroo | Apr 13, 2006 11:55:32 AM
In my dealings with insurance companies, it sounds eminently plausible that after 9 weeks nobody knows what's going on. Incompetence is far more common than conspiracy.
Posted by: walleroo | Apr 13, 2006 11:59:47 AM
walleroo,
So, you wouldn't know what a piece of your property was insured for 9 weeks after it was lost or destroyed?
I can understand the wranglings and lack of agreement as to what replacement value might be.
What I can't understand is not knowing whether the property was insured for replacement cost or actual cash value.
Posted by: bad_patti | Apr 13, 2006 12:16:13 PM
"What I can't understand is not knowing whether the property was insured for replacement cost or actual cash value."
Where are you getting that?
It sounds as if the "discussion" is about how much the structutre was worth.
From the article:
“Right now, we are just gathering information and finding out what options we have,” Tobin said. “Once we know what the building was worth and what [the insurance company] will pay, then we’ll know what we can con-truct.”
Since there are not a lot of other Victorian train station realestate sales to go by in the market, I'd bet the value determination is a mite more difficult than a watch or even a home.
Posted by: Right of Center™ | Apr 13, 2006 12:25:24 PM
