By Charles Layton
The Historic Preservation Commission seems to have persuaded the Neptune Planning Board to include stronger protections for Ocean Grove in its rewrite of the Master Plan.
But the Ocean Grove Home Owners Association remains at odds with the Planning Board over its own issues, and it appears that a fight between the two groups may be in the offing.
The newly-included language proposed by the HPC stresses the importance of Ocean Grove’s architectural heritage, its emphasis on single-family homes, and such defining characteristics of the town plan as the flared setback on avenues near the ocean.
The Planning Board has been working for months on a total rewrite of the Master Plan, a document that lays out basic goals and guidelines for land use and zoning.
Last week, the HPC passed a resolution expressing concern that the board’s proposed rewrite did not do enough to protect the Grove’s historic heritage. But at a public meeting on Wednesday night, the board revealed that it had inserted into its draft much of the language suggested by the HPC.
Also on Wednesday, the Historical Society of Ocean Grove weighed in for the first time with a letter to the Planning Board, in which it agreed with the issues raised by the HPC and also with a broader range of concerns raised by the Home Owners Association.
While acceding to most of what the HPC had asked for, the Planning Board made no concessions to the Home Owners. Members of the Home Owners board who were present at the meeting came away unhappy with that, and also with the Planning Board’s refusal to allow comment from members of the public.
“This is nonsense,” Home Owners trustee Fran Paladino told me after it was made clear that no one would be allowed to voice concerns or raise questions. The three-hour meeting was taken up by a lengthy report to the Planning Board by its consultant Jennifer Beahm, covering the details of the entire 207-page draft of the proposed new Master Plan.
In a letter delivered on Friday, a committee of the Home Owners had expressed fears that this new plan, as written, would be bad for Ocean Grove. (For full details, read the Home Owners letter here.)
There was no indication on Wednesday night that the Planning Board was in any mood to accommodate the Home Owners’ concerns. Neither did the Home Owners trustees show any willingness to back off, and it seems likely that the issue will be raised at the group’s next membership meeting, which is on September 24.
One of the Home Owners’ chief concerns is a suggestion in the Planning Board’s draft that the Township create a new Land Use Advisory Committee to make decisions as to whether “minor changes that have been found to be di-minimus [sic] in nature can be approved administratively” rather than going to the Zoning Board of Adjustment. The Home Owners committee’s letter said it feared this new bureaucratic layer of authority would “usurp the authority of the existing citizens boards, replacing their judgments with the judgments of various executives of the Township. This would potentially allow for more decisions to be made outside the public’s view, and would be an invitation to more political influence and insider dealing.”
Support for the Home Owners position on this and some other issues appeared to be growing in certain quarters. In its Wednesday letter, the Historical Society made a point of concurring with issues raised by the Home Owners. Gail Shaffer, president of the Historical Society, told me she was especially concerned about the issue of the proposed new advisory committee. Deborah Osepchuk, chairwoman of the HPC, told me she too was concerned about that issue, although she stressed that she was speaking only for herself, not for the HPC, on that matter.
Another major concern of the Home Owners committee is the proposal’s frequent recommendations that various rules on zoning, density limits, the flared setback and other issues important to Ocean Grove be “reviewed,” “redrafted” or “evaluated.” So much “broad language in the Master Plan, urging such sweeping changes, would give present and future administrations too much discretion to make whatever changes they please,” the Home Owners letter said.
The Historical Society’s letter specifically supported the Home Owners on this issue. It spoke of “weakly defined language that urges sweeping changes to the present regulations.”
Osepchuk said she was pleased that the Planning Board had accepted the HPC’s suggestion to put protective language from the old Master Plan into the draft of the new one. “There are marked improvements from what was originally written,” she said, but added that “there is still room for some tweaking.”
One important historical passage from the old Master Plan, which Osepchuk’s commission succeeded in having transplanted into the new one, described Ocean Grove’s physical decline in the 1990s as hotels and rooming houses for summer lodgers gave way to multi-family residences and boarding houses for the indigent. Legal changes since then, prohibiting similar conversions to multi-family residential use, “have limited additional deterioration and facilitated a renaissance of investment in single-family housing, bed and breakfasts and historic hotels,” the restored language says. It continues: “These types of uses are more appropriate to the scale and character of the [historic] district and provide appropriate development that preserves the character of Ocean Grove.” The newly included language also promises “a strong commitment to the protection and preservation of Ocean Grove’s unique town plan, particularly its flared setback, and all properties designated as having architectural and historic significance.”
The HPC considered that language important to protecting Ocean Grove’s status as a National Historic District.
Planning Board Chairman Joseph Shafto said the public would not have a chance to speak before the board until it meets on November 9 for what could be its final consideration of the Master Plan. Between now and November 9, however, anyone who wishes to submit a letter for the board’s consideration may do so, Shafto said.
After the plan is approved, in whatever form, by the Planning Board, the Board and its attorneys would then rewrite the local land use ordinance based on what’s in the new Master Plan. The new ordinance would then be passed into law by the Township Committee.
One member of the Township Committee who lives in Ocean Grove has been heard from.
Isn’t there another member who lives and works in Ocean Grove?
Ken, I agree. My comments were not intended to keep people away from the Nov. 9 meeting; they were simply meant to explain the difference between residential and commercial taxes. I hope that anyone and everyone with an interest in the master plan attends the meeting.
Mary Beth – I for one do believe that more residential development does NOT bring NET money (or add much increased costs) to the Township whereas commercial, retail and industrial developments do with their increased tax assessments. Another couple of kids added to such a large school enrollment would be inconsequential financially and the other services already serve Ocean Grove’s streets. I trust that decisions in regard to Ocean Grove and all of Neptune will continue to be made observing all relevant ordinances. There are some items in the proposed Master Plan which could negatively affect Ocean Grove in the future, and I am pleased the HPC, OGHOA and HSOG are making their concerns public. The public can certainly influence the new Master Plan by attending the Planning Board meetings and making their opinions clearly heard (and loudly in case the BOARD members are not paying attention). Write letters, send emails, make phone calls, lobby in person, whatever, but make your concerns known. All should mark Nov 9th on the calender as a must meeting to attend. NOV 9th.! NOV 9TH. ! Do not forget to attend NOV 9th.
ken
Appleation, residential taxes bring in money, but it goes back out the door to educate children (and yes, some do live in the Grove), trash pickup, police and fire services, brush and bulk pickup, playground/park maintenance, recreation department, senior center, snow removal, things like that. By the time residential tax revenues are compared to residential operational costs, there’s very little – if anything – left over.
Now, compare that with any one of our larger commercial/retail businesses. They pay their taxes, and then they are responsible for their own garbage collection, parking lot snow removal, but even though they don’t send kids to school, use the recreation or senior services departments, or the parks or playgrounds, they still pay for them. They do pay for and utilize fire and police services. Much more of their tax dollar is retained by the town and used to offset areas where tax revenue does not cover operational costs.
We don’t play the ratables chase game in Neptune. It’s not healthy for our residents or our town. Responsible development in areas to which it is appropriate is what is healthy for Neptune/Ocean Grove residents. If a home has unfortunately been destroyed by fire or demolition, in 99% of cases, the appropriate replacement is a single family home.
I am the sole member of the Township Committee to vote against the North End plan, and I still believe that single-family homes and not condos should be built on that site. I lived in the Grove for 13 years and I still actively search for ways to bring parking relief during the summer. I’m the liaison to development. Don’t you think I would have gone nuclear very loudly and very publicly if I heard of some condo scheme? I know it can be hard to believe, but I can get really unpleasant when someone tries to pull a fast one. The master plan is a high-level outline of residential, commercial, mixed use, retail and industrial areas. It’s what keeps someone from buying two complete blocks of Webb Avenue and building a Super Kmart.
Mary Beth,
Can you expect anyone to believe that residential taxes don’t bring any real money to the Twp. The biggest item in the Neptune budget is schools. How many children from OG attend school? How many condo owners even have children of school age? How many are seasonal? What services beyond police, trash, library and snow removal are you rendering anyway? With 25 per cent of the taxes in Neptune coming from OG we should have a big voice in any development or plan, yet you would have us allowing uncontrolled decisions to be made. What’s the reason for changing the Master Plan if not to increase the tax base? By the way, if this plan passes the way its written let’s see how many developers appear needing increased density and height. In the end who votes on the master plan?
Hi folks —
I’m not dealing with the master plan in any way — I have enough on my plate with the police department, finances, derelict structures in OG, getting ready for the next phase of redevelopment in Midtown and the new retail development in West Neptune — but I can tell you that right now, there has been no talk of condos, at least to the Township Committee, beyond those proposed at the North End. No one has come in to make a pitch, no one has contacted administration, nothing. There’s no secret condo plan.
And sorry, Michael Grover, Neptune doesn’t need money badly enough to whore out the Grove. If we did, Regal Homes and the North End projects would be finished and occupied by now. Residential development doesn’t bring in any real money to the township, anyway, because of the services that must be provided to residents. Commercial, retail and industrial development is what eases property tax burdens on a town, and even if we could get a Kia assembly plant in Neptune, we wouldn’t be looking to put it in the Grove.
Today I surveyed my neighbors and a couple of folks I ran into elsewhere with regard to the Master Plan and all it’s repercussions. These people are all OG homeowners as well as year rounders. All but one had no knowledge at all regarding the plan. Sad. but true. To Norm’s point–our neighbor’s as well as any other interested parties need to be alerted.
Norm et al — the meeting is Nov. 9. Denis made a typo in his comment.
Denis, I thought the board’s attorney indicated the next special meeting is Nov. 9. Correct me if I am wrong.
Also in a private conversation with him during the break in the meeting, he responded to my question that the two sessions were for input–and that no changes would be made in the document in the interim by the next special meeting.
He also added after questioning that at the next meeting the board could make amendments and that they could even adopt the plan at that meeting.
We obviously need some clarity about these procedures.
We need to start moving. All the above comments are right on the mark. We’ve got to stop voting for the people who are supporting the new “Master Planners” without supporting their constituents. We’ve got to threaten our officials with loss of votes and contributions. Unfortunately, we have many part-time residents who don’t vote and are unable to be here during this critical time. They too must be informed of what this plan can do to OG. They are taxpayers and should be heard as well (maybe by petition). Everyone needs to pitch in NOW or what we know of as a wonderful little beach town will no longer remain. The ultimate solution will be a political one. The $$$ guys should not be the automatic winners.
Blogfinger:
The Ocean Grove Home Owners Association is conducting dialogue with the Neptune Township Committee and the Planning Board regarding the possible revisions to the Master Plan in a non-confrontational manner and does not anticipate a fight. As always, the OGHOA stands ready and willing to move forward in any way necessary to prevent permanent harm to the Historic District, should that time come.
My Master Plan Committee is comprised of individuals dedicated to our town and will continue to work with the township committee. We will have input at the public portion of the special planning board meeting on October 9th. Please do not characterize our talks as adversarial because of some current disagreements which may be resolved in the near future.
The township committee decides what goes into the master plan. I am confident they will act in the best interest of the home owners represented by the OGHOA.
I believe the language in the proposed Master Plan is intended to further develop ratables for the Township in Ocean Grove at the expense of its residents. The Board is attempting to set up a structure that will permit replacement of B and B’s with condominiums and development of larger structures, further adding to our density.
Don’t count on the HPC to protect us, using historic preservation as grounds to prevent conversions. Recent decisions and the North End project demonstrate their weakness against the Planning Board.
As for the Township Committee, don’t look to them for much help either. The town needs money, and this is New Jersey, enough said. We will need to protect ourselves.
amen
To all: The proposed LAND USE ADVISORY COMMITTEE should strike terror into most New Jersey residents. It supposedly would only rule on “deminimus” items instead of having the various boards look at them. OMG!!! “Deminimus” to a developer could well be “monumentally” life changing to a neighbor who never gets the opportunity to express concern at a public hearing.
Remember this IS New Jersey. Anyone who accepts such a proposal to sidestep Boards charged with enforcing the Ordinances should read the testimony of a witness in a trial in Federal Court as reported in today’s Star Ledger on page 1. Read the paper or google the website. Mr.Mazzocchi bluntly tells how to get things done in NJ.
Ocean Grove residents need to show up at the Nov 9th meeting to support the OGHOA position or “forever hold your peace.”
ken
appeation,
Going after the Township Committee members does nothing because Ocean Grove keeps on helping to vote them in
The usual suspects: inordinately long presentations by paid consultants, board members raising “safe” issues, and limited participation by the grassroots public–and worse yet in this case no public input.
Having received the Home Owners Association’s detailed and documented concerns days ahead of last night’s meeting: add the board’s reluctance to be challenged and engage in a controversial discussion over its proposed document.
Most public organizations have cited a proposed new Land Use Advisory Committee as potentially very dangerous to Ocean Grove. Who determines what a “minor change” is that it would have jurisdiction over? And would their determinations be advisory to the township staff completely bypassing any governance review and public input as is currently indicated in the proposal.
Two issues raised by the Home Owners Association in its advanced written analysis of the master plan proposal is a call for greater emphasis on “height” and “density.” Needless to say ignoring these two critical issues portends a rocky future for the quality of life existing in Ocean Grove.
It would appear to be time for the Home Owners Association and the Historical Society, which gratefully endorsed its position, to consider a multi-media approach to educate the residents of the community and in turn exert the appropriate pressure for a responsive Township. After all, by the latest account Ocean Grove is paying 25% of total taxes collected by the Township.
Neglecting “height” and “density” could be interpreted by some that Ocean Grove continues to be milked as “the cash cow.”
Norm
This is a wonderful plan to benefit the “developers” as well as the Township vis a vis an increased tax base. It also makes it open season on OG.
Go after the township committee members and ask them why our comments are not being heard. The public needs some answers now before it’s too late. There should be no vote allowed until the public has been heard and all subject matter been cleared. Under this new plan there will be no recourse.