.

Marketing of Seaford Avenue School Property Well Underway

Information about availability of former elementary school land communicated on national level.

The process of determining future plans for the former Seaford Avenue School property is now well underway in the marketing stages with many developers expressing interest.

The former elementary school is being marketed for sale by Woodbury-based Greiner-Maltz, which was this past June by the Seaford Board of Education as the commercial real estate firm best suited to help determine the property's future. After closing in 1981, the 1939-built Seaford Avenue School building served as the home of Five Towns College and most recently Nassau BOCES until its lease expired last year. 

John Pujia, Senior Director at Greiner-Maltz, said the firm has communicated to more than 12,000 commercial real estate contacts throughout the country about the availability of the 5.6 acre property located on 2165 Seaford Ave. Pujia said developers have expressed an interest for various uses of the property including multi-family housing, assisted living and sports.

"We've had a lot of interest," Pujia said. "Our marketing has been very extensive."

Greiner-Maltz has experience working with other school districts including developing a luxury condo development at a former elementary school in Lawrence as well as an assisted living proposal currently being worked on for property owned by the Syosset-Woodbury School District. Pujia has previously estimated that around $5 million could be reaped for the Seaford School District if it decides to maintain one or two of the existing youth baseball fields on the property.

"We don't have any definite prospects about the building yet but the marketing of the building is definitely taking place," said Seaford Superintendent of School Brian Conboy during his administrative report at the Dec. 1 Board of Education meeting.

Late last year, the Seaford School District issued a community input that 643 district residents responded to on what to do with the former elementary school. The survey showed strong opposition to many options for the property, but did indicate support for maintaining the three youth baseball fields on the land. Any proposal for the property would need to be approved by the community in a referendum vote.

Pujia said there is no timetable for how long the marketing stages for the Seaford Avenue School property will last and when a recommendation will be made.

Lorraine DeVita December 13, 2011 at 05:06 PM
Just what we need a GYM or some other Athletic faciltiy- Seaford NEEDS Another FIELD OF DREAMS ? with more traffic, at all hours, Does no one in this town think besides of their own wants? Whats best for the neighbors, the neighborhood and the community. You need to "play" go join a gym there are quiet a few within a 3 mile radius. This is in the middle of a residential area would YOU like a sports complex next door to you? probably not.. SO why insist that these homeowners be subjected to some form of something you wouldnt want next door to you ? As far as keeping PART of the property for atheltic fields..they are only used for one or two seasons out of the year , arent maintained look like hell and are a place for kids to hang out after dark. If you have such little regard for your community why not just sell the property to Billy Dean and T mobile .. Gyrating strippers on cell towers to generate even more income and would add so much value to the surrounding homes! and NO i dont live next to the buidling, i just know i wouldnt want an atheltic facility next door to me .
Chris Wendt December 13, 2011 at 05:37 PM
With 10,000 Baby Boomers turning 66 every day during 2012, an assisted living facility would make sense from a marketing perspective. The trailing edge of the Baby Boom is turning 48 during 2012, so there is and will continue to be a growing demand and need for assisted living facilities for the next 40-50 years. Putting those facilities in residential neighborhoods is not only fashionable, but ultimately considerate of the younger people in the families of aging Boomers.. Another very attractive attribute of assisted living faciilities is that they will never cause over-crowded classrooms in the local public schools. I don't feel an educational facility would be as economically viable, to wit, Five Towns College and BOCES both abandoned their leases on the property. One thing Seaford should be careful to guard against with this facility is the likelihood that the next venture there could fail, leading to yet another unknown use in the future, but one over which the community will not have any 'veto' power through a referendum.
Wayne Smith December 13, 2011 at 10:04 PM
I have the feeling that we're going to be confronting the harsh reality that "beggars can't be choosers" when it comes to the Seaford Ave. school. While Greiner-Maltz may be doing some aggressive marketing, Mr. Conboy is also making it clear that there are no "definite prospects" for the building and the article makes it clear that Greiner-Maltz is not projecting a specific timetable for a recommendation. Personally, I doubt we're going to be seeing anything happening real soon. Meanwhile, the district's fiscal situation continues to be challenging.
Lorraine DeVita December 13, 2011 at 10:32 PM
Wayne correct me if i am wrong, did we not have the golden opportunity to sell the albatross many moons ago when McCoy was on the SB didnt we have a chance to sell EITHER the Seaford ave school OR the Jackson ave school! For some bizzare reason we/they chose to sell the Jackson Ave school and keep the beast.. in hindsight we ahould have sold BOTH ..
Wayne Smith December 13, 2011 at 10:37 PM
That sounds vaguely famliar but my recollection is real vague so not sure I could say one way or another.
Chris Wendt December 14, 2011 at 02:42 AM
You guys shouldn't get too down in the dumps with this. It will be sold, and much of Seaford's money worries will be taken care of as a result. You have a big day to look forward to with this...take heart!
Wayne Smith December 14, 2011 at 10:27 AM
From your lips to God's ears. But let's be honest: even if they get $5 million for the property (a big if....) you're talking less than 10% of one year's budget. What it would do is buy some time for the board to meaningfully address the structural problems with the budget, while temporarily mitigating some of the pain that taxpayers are in. But only if this thing sells fast, and in that regard I think expectations should be tempered.
Lorraine DeVita December 14, 2011 at 01:09 PM
Wayne and Chris, Hopefully the building doesnt get sold until AFTER the UTS contract is negotiated settle in 2012/2013, because it will be used as a bargaining point if it is sold prior to and not utilized immediately. and as we all know NOTHING is done immediately ...
Chris Wendt December 14, 2011 at 01:29 PM
Lorraine, you may want to check into the current regulations concerning the use of proceeds from the sale of a school. You then ought to check in with BoE to see what their intentions are for those proceeds. If they don't yet have any, that would be an excellent conversation to get started with them, so that there is at least the hope of transparency in the planning, and so that the proper expectations can be set for the district and for the Seaford taxpayers. In Wantagh, we established a reserve fund which was drawn down over a specified number of years to mitigate taxes. The annual draw-down was gradually reduced over time to lessen the impact of the ultimate depletion of the reserve fund.
Wayne Smith December 14, 2011 at 01:41 PM
Yeah, that's a good point as is Chris's comment about setting this up as an annuity. Don't know whether or to what extent the board has considered this.
Lorraine DeVita December 15, 2011 at 08:56 PM
Chris , .. I dont think they have even given it a thought that far ahead. When asked specfic questions about things that dont need immediate URGENT attention we get the DEER in the headlights look. a blank startled stare, it is not appropriate to discuss it at this time. SO While i appreciate your normal and logical approach of forsight and planning, there seems to be a shortage of that in these here parts ! lmao.. they have their hands full and fingers in dike trying to plug holes BECASUE they dont PLAN long term.. its a common trait.. something in the water i think... OH congrats on having a BOARd of Ed that actually takes the time to SEARCH for QUALIFIED experienced candidates for Superintendent hopefully they learned from Seafords mistakes and lack of due dilligence ! BTW... Do you think someone could divert Wantagh water over here to Seaford?
Tommy the Taxpaying fool December 19, 2011 at 01:10 PM
All I know Lorraine is I pretty sure any budget proposed to the tax payers (not the bogus 18 yr old voters) will g down in flames. Maybe worse then last time. I also predict many other school districts following Seafords lead on this as was 2011. We will see our teachers all wearing black and marching around in the morning. They refusr to be brought into 2011-2012 reality. SAD.
Lorraine DeVita December 19, 2011 at 01:33 PM
Tommy, Hopefully the Board and Conboy learned a valuable lesson last year.Additionally I hope the Board truly utilizes the Advisory committee The biggest complaint i have heard is " they just gave us lip service and did what they wanted , what a waste of time" Which is sad and frustrating for not only the people who worked on the committee but very telling that these "committees" are for show only. My only hope is that this NEW board works WITH the advisory committee and takes the suggestions /ideas comments etc and works with them rather then IGNOR them. As for the UTS- if BLACK is their TRUE COLOR then so be it.. change is coming and I fervently hope they realize that ,and work WITH the community rahter then against it . Voting DOWN a budget is not something we should strive for, Voting FOR a sound fiscally responsible REALISTIC budget and supporting the students and education while being mindful of the communitys needs and ability to pay is something this Board and administration need to focus on. A BALANCE is needed, which is going to be a hard road to follow expecially with all the special interest groups clamoring for their UNFAIR share of the pie. BALANCE , reality, fiscal responsibility .. If we can obtain that without breaking the backs of the community then Seaford should be on the road to recovery .. HOPEFULLY....lets see what happens , I hope for the sake of the kids & the community Conboy realizes and understands that.
Wayne Smith December 19, 2011 at 02:06 PM
Based on some prior exchanges I've had with Mr. Aldrich among others, the Budget Advisory Committee has had a pretty limited portfolio, which is to say that, if I understood this correctly, their mission was to simply look at the current year's proposed budget (as opposed to a multi-year review) and they were further limited to the extent that contractual obligations - in other words, compensation - were also not to be considered. Maybe this is changing; maybe it already has. But the point is, there does need to be a meaningful dialogue about compensation - particularly insofar as how much Seaford really can afford to pay - and there also needs to be some due diligence appied to evaluating re-structuring options that would probably play out over multiple years. If these broader topics are considered off-limits, there's really not much of a budget conversation to have.
Lorraine DeVita December 19, 2011 at 02:26 PM
Transparency, like I have stated numerous times is NOT a word in the Seaford Administrative & Board vocabulary or dictionary. People who have something to hide USUALLY dont want anyone digging around..Mr. Adlrich has a MASTERs degree in inane double talk and misdirection. Intitally i thought he was just a wee bit weird and befuddled , now i realize this a carefully crafted and studied ability to change the subject to try to confuse the masses to divert having to answer a direct question clearly and concisely . MBA = Master of BS Administration..Seaford Admin abides by the "WE Cant ASK .. THEY Wont tell" philosophy. I wonder what the OVERSIGHT group has to say about Seafords finances and HOW the districts funds are utilized Seems Admin doesnt take suggestions from them either.They get VERY touchy when asked THAt question.. Wonder why? hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...
gary March 17, 2012 at 07:40 PM
You didn't live there when it was an elementary school,the fields were full of kids all summer long, not in front of a computer screen. We don't need more over-priced,poorly built housing. Seaford is FULL. no more new homes.Just because you are a fat lazy slob with no use for an athletic field doesn't mean the rest of us don't
gary March 17, 2012 at 07:44 PM
Assisted living is a sham, we do not need or want any more new homes in Seaford, no condos, no houses, the ONLY person who benefits is the greedy developer, not the neighbors and not the community. It's a school, lets find a way to keep it one.The people who come up with these lame-brain ideas should be forced to live in the abominations they want to create.
gary March 17, 2012 at 07:47 PM
Seaford's money worries will be over? That is quite possibly the stupidest thing I ever heard from a grown man. You are so full of shit, you should go into politics.
Lorraine DeVita March 20, 2012 at 05:38 PM
You are so erudite Gary! Lets see if you have been to the "fields" lately- have you picked up the broken glass and beer bottles? the odd assorted used condom? the garbage? have you mowed the fields, limed them?Fixed the shed, the backstops? the benches? had to pull your car out of a driveway and been blocked? put up with the kids hanging out after dark? Kids playing are a wonderful sound, kids crying becaseu they got hurt isnt.kids hanging out becaseu they have nothing to do after dark and their parents dont give a damn where they are isnt something anyone wants in their backyard. . So being the civic minded individual that you are who only wants to keep these fields regardless of the cost and upkeep when there are a plethura of fields in the neighborhood to be used by any organziation then i strongly suggest you put your money and your lazy sloppy ass regardless of the size and volunteer to insure the upkeep on these fields are equal to the safety of the kids using them..and the quality of life the neighbors who bought next to those same fields retain. Additionally having lived here as long if not longer then you i can assure you the "fat lazy slob" who wears a size 10-12 and who is as lazy as allowed by her family and retirment is being cognizant of her neighbors and their home values and the qaulity of life we all deserve. ... are you? or are you just being sentimentaly stupid and unthinking with a capitol S> And Gary i use my last name with no qualms DO YOU?
Lorraine DeVita March 20, 2012 at 05:47 PM
There you go again Gary what ever you name is - Asssited living is not a sham it is a viable alternative for seniors who have payed their DUEs to retain ownership in a community they love at a reasonable cost for peace of mind and assistance. . There are some wonderful assisted living facilities. Condos or townhomes would be another alternative for the over 55 age group, where the need is great and one which would not add "COST" to the district with additional students, but would give us additonal tax revenue. Keeping the school after so many years of ignoring its manitenance is financially and morally ignorant. The monies we would have to pay to bring this building back to code and safety regs is more then we can afford. Thinking helps when you post a statment, which is perhaps why you dont post your last name...

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »