By Charles Layton
THURSDAY, February 24 — The owners of 80 Main Avenue pleaded guilty today to a list of property maintenance violations dating from July of last year. However, under an unusual agreement with Neptune Township, the owners will be allowed to seek permission to tear the place down rather than repair it.
The property, a former doctor’s office, has been empty and deteriorating for several years. The owners’ attorney, William Gannon, told Blogfinger that it is in very bad condition. He said it has a hole in the roof and there was once a fire inside. He said the owners have tried to sell the property and at one time last year had a serious buyer, but the purchase deal fell through. According to Gannon, owning the building has become a major burden for the owners. “If you know anyone who wants to buy it, let me know,” he said. (He said he didn’t know what the asking price might be.)
For its part, Neptune Code Enforcement has been trying to get the owners, Hal Ornstein and Mark W. Ornstein, to address a list of violations including rotted or missing wood, peeling paint and shingles missing or broken. The Township would like to see the building saved if possible. It is on the Historic Preservation Commission’s list of properties considered to be of architectural and historic importance. It is one of Ocean Grove’s “century homes,” so called because they were awarded plaques in 1976 identifying them as 100 years old at that time.
For much of the past year, the Township has issued citations and imposed fines against the owners, and today the case finally came before Judge Robin Wernik in Municipal Court. Standing before Wernik, Gannon and the Township’s attorney, Gene Anthony, explained that they had reached a plea agreement.
Under the agreement, the owners pleaded guilty to the violations subject to a $1,250 fine. However, $1,000 of that fine is suspended on the condition that the defendants apply to the HPC for permission to demolish the building. Because of the building’s historic significance, Township officials seem to think the HPC might well refuse to approve such an application. Therefore, the defendants are also required, simultaneously, to file for permission to make the required external repairs. Both applications must be made within one week.
Anthony explained that, under the plea agreement, once an HPC decision is made either way, the owners will have 30 days to act — that is, to demolish the building or to make repairs, whichever the HPC requires. If they do not, the owners would have to pay the suspended portion of the fine — $1,000 — and Anthony would go back to court and ask Wernik to enforce the Township’s violation order.
Speaking with Gannon after his court appearance, I asked what the owners would do with the property if the HPC allowed them to demolish the building. He said he didn’t know, but he said the property is zoned for single-family housing.
There is always one sure way to sell a property: begin reducing the price until a qualified buyer finds the price appealing. 80 Main was originally listed at $475,000 and was reduced to $459,000 on 7-17-10. At one time the property was worth substantially more but times have changed and when owners fail to recognize the reality of the existing market, they hold on to unrealistic and unsaleable price points.
If due to the sluggish R.E. market and its rundown condition no one is willing to pay $459,000 then the owners need to take the hit and reduce the house further. If the house is condemned and taken down and then the owners offer the vacant lot for sale, they will not attain the $459,000 price. Vacant lots on Main close to the ocean sell for less.
If we are to preserve our historic heritage, then the HPC should not allow this house to be taken down. If the owners are not willing to spend the money required to put the house in good shape and maintain it, then they should recognize the value of the investment is lower than they had hoped and reduce the price to a sellable price point. If they reduce it I’m sure they could find a buyer.
The notoriety of 80 Main’s “demo by neglect” has been known and publicized for over a year.
If ever there was a cause that needs a Kevin Chambers it is 80 MAIN. Someone with the tenacity of a Kevin is needed to save this historic structure. Such a mission would surely get the backing of Ocean Grovers and rather than denigrating his doggedness we would have to be admiring and supportive instead.
This is a battle that the courts would have to see as an obvious travesty of Neptune’s Ordinances and regulations. If Township attorneys could not win this one then there is absolutely no hope for the Historic Preservation of Ocean Grove.
When we remodeled our small cottage we had to sit at a public meeting before the HPC and provide samples of colors, building materials and other specific details before the entire committee. We were sworn in, a lawyer was present who asked questions with the committee and a transcript was taken. If our plan was not approved we would not have received a permit to renovate the property. Once the Certificate of Appropriateness was granted, then and only then would the building department issue a permit.
In that respect the HPC does have enforcement. If you do not follow the guidelines laid out by the committee you will not receive a building permit. If you do not receive a permit, you can not build or remodel!
Iris,
My error. My comment was intended for lisa.
Sounds like Mr. Hoffman has a good point.
OK, yet another historic structure in danger of demolition. I’m trying to understand. It will cost more to restore a structure, than to build a new one? Why would anyone buy a 100 + year old historic structure without intending to restore it? How did it get this far? How can we prevent more of the same? Did we not learn anything from the Sampler debacle and others? Or are we to be relieved with the attitude of ‘It’s better than what was there’, like the Ocean Pathway condos. Before more history is lost forever, can there not be one clear, enforcible set of ordinances and codes in place to govern all construction and restoration? Instead of various committees who seem to work at cross purposes with different goals, just one organization who’s only charge is to maintain the integrity of this Historic Site. Am I being too unrealistic?
Can we conclude from the decision that the HPC is still in control of the fate of this building? It seems that the owners are required to put the property through the demolition process if the HPC allows it to proceed. They have the authority to approve or deny the application.
If they deny the application to demolish the building, the owners will have to do cosmetic repairs in compliance with HPC guidelines. In my opinion, we do not know if such repairs will solve the problems presented by a neglected structure because the interior of the building has not been inspected. Other than Mr. Gannon’s claims in court, we know nothing about the condition of the structure, whether or not it is a hazard, how much a restoration would cost, and whether or not a restoration would be cost-effective.
Yes, it is an historic property and it would be nice to see it restored. But if it is not cost-effective to do so, how can the owners be forced to assume this responsibility? You could argue that the fine is not sufficient to prevent similar neglect by other owners in town. But who would buy a building in Ocean Grove if they know that a significant fine would be leveled for whatever might be considered “neglect” at the time?
There are so many considerations presented by this situation. I don’t know what the solution would be, but I think that the practical, common sense truth is that historic preservation is ultimately up to the good will of the property owner.
Cthulu — I’m sorry, but I don’t agree. The entire community has a stake in preventing OG’s buildings from running down. Partly, it’s that we’re a Historic District and these buildings are the patrimony of us all. But that aside, no owner has the right to let his property become blighted. It’s a matter of public safety.
We’ve seen what fires can do in a place like Ocean Grove, how quickly they can spread. And we know that abandoned, blighted buildings have a tendency to catch fire. We saw that happen with the Camp Meeting’s abandoned storage building at 17 Spray in 2008 — a frightening blaze that almost took at least one other house down with it on Spray. That building had waves of code violations over many years. But the township dithered, and following some political intervention in 2005 the code violations and summonses and pending fines were forgiven and dismissed. And then, three years later, the place burned down.
We have testimony from the owner and others that there was once a fire in the 91 Cookman house, another run-down abandoned property, and now Bill Gannon tells me there was a fire inside 80 Main as well. The danger of fire was a main reason the township ordered the Sampler Inn torn down. And it’s one of the concerns of neighbors trying to get something done now about the Park View Inn.
But my point is that it doesn’t work for the township government to dither and delay until a building is so far gone that it’s a hazard and beyond saving. The best policy, for everyone’s benefit, is that our maintenance codes be enforced while there’s still a chance to save the building. Otherwise why even have maintenance codes?
Charles – You can press on code enforcement all you like, but all the rights still reside with the property owners. They have the right to let their building go to hell and keep it one step above falling down. I don’t know how aggressively the township can go after *any* of these property owners without harassing them. (Especially when the municipal judge has made it clear that she is more interested in the criminal cases before her than a land use case – I judge not the judge and I don’t envy her her position.) This is still the US and property owner’s rights still do have a whiff of the sacred about them.
Ken—I haven’t posted yet and already you’re responding to me…?
The HPC may not have enforcement power, but it does have the ability—and the responsibility—to ensure that the process set out in its own demolition by neglect ordinance is followed. When reports of the conditions at 91 Cookman and 80 Main weren’t issued by the Construction Official, pursuant to the ordinance, the HPC should have at least taken notice of that fact and asked why not. It didn’t. And because it didn’t, the rest of the ordinance—the part that requires the owners of those buildings to submit a plan for their remediation to the HPC—couldn’t ever happen. Lack of enforcement authority is not an excuse for this failure.
Donna — Mr. Gannon is the lawyer for the owners. It’s the owners who’d have to pay and correct the cited code violations.
The demolition hearing hasn’t been scheduled. First, the owners have to apply to the HPC for demolition. Also, simultaneously, they have to apply for permission to make repairs. They have one week to do both those things.
If the HPC denies permission to demolish but approves their plan to make repairs, they’d then have 30 days from that time to make the repairs.
I would also say, in answer to Cthulu, that Neptune Code Enforcement has only cited this property for some exterior violations. I don’t believe the township has ever even inspected the interior. Why they have not would seem to be a fair question. In my opinion the township should have come to this case much sooner than it did, and should have moved much more aggressively. Since it didn’t, now we’re faced with possibly losing a Century Home in a prime location. I think the lesson is, we as citizens just have to impress on Code Enforcement the importance of saving properties like this. They don’t seem to get it.
To echo ken’s comments, the HPC is an advisory commission only. They are just there to make sure everyone isn’t painting their house in neon colors and that they don’t wrap their houses in vinyl and plastic. And believe it or not, you have the freedom to have a crappy looking building. You are not free to let your building become a hazard to everyone else though. Clearly the building is structurally sound if they only have $1250 in fines. That doesn’t mean it’s pretty though.
Fines..$1250..what a joke!! And what is happening with our other derelict properties? At last count..#91 Cookman had 20+ violations (visible from outside, as inspector has never been allowed inside) and has never paid any fines. When it went to court as a ‘demolition by neglect’ case..the judge threw it out. So..what happens now? Nothing for another 13 years??
Help me understand this, if the hpc doesn’t grant a demolition permit then Gannon has to fix the building and pay the fine? All in a week? and when is the demolition hearing.
iris, the HPC has been given NO enforcement authority.
I need someone to help me understand the logic behind all this. Do I understand correctly that the total amount of fines amount to only $1250? If that is true does anyone really believe that this is an enticement for keeping one’s home up to code and in reasonable condition? Surely the amount for cosmetic repairs will be in the 10’s of thousands. Given the circumstances, its easy to see why buildings so easily become derelict.
Again, what is the purpose of the HPC versus the town building inspection? Lots of towns have no HPC yet building inspectors in other towns not only have the jurisdiction to fine, they also have the responsibility to board up any building that fails to live up to occupancy standards.
Maybe I am expecting too much, but it seems like there is either too much governance or not enough enforcement of existing state and city law. Help me understand.
lisa,
Contrary to popular belief, the HPC has been given NO enforcement power at all.
Truer words were never spoken.
This is very perplexing. It seems that the rules of living in a town on The Historic Registry seem to apply to some homeowners but not others. The HPC has carefully set the rules and is given authority to enforce them, but the judicial system does not follow through. Many volunteers spend hours upon hours on preservation of the town’s architectural integrity. I just do not understand how this case could even be given this type of decision.
If the HPC lets this historic corner building on the most traveled street in town be demolished, then they might as well save the taxpayers money and shut the HPC down.