New metered parking on Cookman Avenue (AP). Note the numbered spaces and the pay station. (internet photo)
By Paul Goldfinger, editor @Blogfinger
The last time we brought up this subject on Blogfinger, the reaction was resoundingly negative. The reasons included the “cash cow” argument, the ugly meters argument, and the loss of spaces available to residents argument.
But now, the parking situation by the beach has become more complicated due to the realization that visitors from Asbury Park and Bradley Beach are parking in the Grove to avoid feeding meters elsewhere.
Perhaps we can now argue that meters represent a winning situation for all concerned except the alien interlopers.
Consider this:
—The “cash cow” argument is invalid because meters will cost Ocean Grove taxpayers nothing. Resentment over our high real estate taxes is not a reasonable part of this debate.
—If Grovers are issued stickers, then they can park for free in metered spots.
—-There will be more spots for Grovers once errant parkers go back where they came from. In addition, justice is served because those outsiders who come to enjoy the Grove will contribute to the town’s upkeep.
—The meters will earn enough money to pay for themselves and add some needed dough for the Neptune Township coffers.
–“Ugly” is no longer an issue. Just go over to AP to see the pay stations. They are few and far between in the metered zones.
What do you think? What am I missing?
Mary Beth: I would like to reply to two issues:
First of all the New Jersey Site Improvement Advisory Board knows the situation of our not owning the property, and their recommendation for parking is that Neptune follow the Municipal Land Use Law’s standards that are used throughout the state. I have a copy of the letter addressed to Neptune from the Sites Board that states that the Township is to follow the standards for parking. It does not matter who owns the property. I’m sorry, but it’s Neptune that decided not to follow their recommendations.
Second, the North End property can handle car parking in the lot, since dumpsters and heavy equipment are parked there all summer with no issues. I would love to see the letter from the engineers stating otherwise. I don’t believe that there are any such letters.
There are 2 tunnels there, and both could be filled with all the excess dirt that is piled next to the pool. It has to be filled in before any construction can even begin; otherwise it would be putting workers in jeopardy.
Last, I have to say the Planning Board sets the parking standards not the Zoning Board. The Planning Board must follow state regulations and local ordinances.
Last, don’t get me started about the North End being in need of redevelopment when it never followed the state statutes to be deemed in need of redevelopment.
Ogrover, the North End lot to which you refer was labeled as unstable and not suitable for parking by the engineers hired by the CMA and/or their developer due to old service tunnels running underneath that lot from the North End mechanical garage to the old North End hotel whose infrastructure had deteriorated and presented the possibility of sinkholes. I am not clear as to whether that area had been zoned for parking previously – even though it was used for such – if the Township receives a report from a duly accredited professional engineer that says a particular structure or area could potentially collapse, it is our duty to ensure the owner protects the public from that hazardous area.
As for the Fitness Store truck being parked on the vacant lot where the Middle School once stood, if the owner has given their permission, that is permissible. However, if the owner was to choose to operate this lot as a commercial parking lot, that would probably require a variance.
I think I understand at least part of the reasoning, however, it doesn’t change the fact that the North End has been and will remain a vacant lot for the forseeable future considering the present economy. The various proposed projects have never came to fruition. The recent high density project with it’s proposed underground parking is not supposed to add to the parking issues but will do nothing to allieviate them either. (Underground parking next to the ocean and a lake? The Titanic was unsinkable, too!) I am not saying the whole area should be parking but mixed usage, with parking fees, to benefit not only the owner and developers but the community as well. Until some viable project comes along having a large vacant lot in a parking starved town makes no sense to me. OK, have at me.
By the way, some Fitness Store truck found the lot next to the Old High School an ideal place to park. Is that legal?
Frank, that law presumes that the person who owns the home also owns the land, which, for the most part in Ocean Grove, is not the case. Most homeowners in the Grove lease the land upon which their home sits from the Camp Meeting Association.
The sites of the former Neptune High School and Middle School were owned, land and building, by the Neptune Board of Education and were sold to the non-profit that operates the Jersey Shore Performing Arts Center for $1. (The empty lot next to the Arts Center where the Middle School once stood is slated to become the permanent home of Mary’s Place, last I heard.)
It is the Zoning Board of Adjustment, an independent board whose members are appointed by the Township Committee, but who are not subject to Committee influence and have no members of the Committee among its members, that hear and either grant or deny applications for relief from parking requirements for multi-unit buildings. (One of the reasons the Township Committee decided to designate the North End an area in need of redevelopment was because that designation allowed the Committee to require adequate off-street parking for that project.)
The New Jersey Sites Comm. states that EVERY homeowner is allowed one parking space, and all new construction is to supply their own parking. Neptune says build as many condos/homes as you like and you don’t have to supply parking….Isn’t that wonderful?
If you buy a house in OG without a driveway, then that’s the residents problem. You don’t own the street,nor does the purchase of a property entitle one to a spot directly in front of the house. That’s the consequence of living in OG by the beach…there are always spots on Inskip and Stockton
We see this in the summer when residents put various cones/childrens toys/furniture in the street to save spaces. The PD has stated that anyone can move them, as the space isn’t property of the homeowner adjacent.
I don’t see any other town with this problem…even Victorian Cape May, also a historic district, has metered parking throughout the town.
“Privately owned” includes owned by the CMA. Privately as opposed to government owned, right?
Told ya this would be fun. Lots of “same old, same old” comments though. Communities all over New Jersey have implemented various permit and/or meter solutions tailored to accomomdate each individual town’s needs. Not until resident parking becomes unbearable will there be the impetus to do “something.”
I guess I was mistaken in the supposition that all the land in Ocean Grove was owned by the CMA. The two lots are privately owned and controlled? How is that possible? (One looks like it’s zoned for weeds while the other one is zoned for dumpsters.) Something seems out of kilter. What other properties in Ocean Grove are privately owned? I know that a sign on Wesley Lake says it’s a privately owned Green Acres area. Who owns the lake?
FYI, the Township doesn’t participate in the ratables chase. Truth is, commercial entities are better for everyone’s bottom line because they have a parking requirement that comes with them and they don’t require as many Township services like schools.
The other truth is that the two lots you mention are privately-owned and their owners have other plans for them. The OG Parking Committee has talked about offsite parking options, but who will use them? Residents, either owner or renter, feel entitled to park as close to their homes as possible (as they should), and visitors want to park as close to the beach, the shopping, the inns, and the Auditorium, where they are spending their disposable income (as they should). So who gives here? What group makes the behavioral change, and how is it achieved? Coastal resort towns on both sides of the country ponder this question every year – because there is no good answer. Your local government either pisses off the local residents (hence the bottle-throwing incident) or they piss off visitors who only visit once or never visit at all.
The Township does not have the estimated $22 million to build a garage to use for at the most 12 weeks of the year. (If we had that kind of money, I’d rather lower our property taxes.)
There’s no magic wand, folks. The Grove simply was not built for cars. We’ll keep looking for something – anything! – that might alleviate the issue, but meters are not the solution. They won’t fix our parking problem, and they really won’t help our revenue stream.
Weighing in here … Any parking ideas or solutions will please some, anger others. No matter what, some plan(s) must to be implemented. As long as density is allowed to increase, the available parking spaces will lessen. It’s simple math!
If you put metered parking along the boardwalk and in the ‘business’ areas, the ‘residential’ areas will have to bear the brunt of the meter avoiders. In the ‘off season’ it is not so bad, but during the summer, “forget about it!” Even now, AP visitors park in the north side of the Grove to avoid those pesky meters. Yes, I see it all the time!
If you go with residential permits, the issue of how many each household, restaurant, boarding house and Inn is allowed to have comes into question. Two per household sounds good to some, but how many 3 and 4 car households will object? What about the seasonal residents and tenters? How many do they get? What about those that have commercial vehicles, do those qualify for residential permits? There are only so many available spaces, people!
There are two fairly large vacant lots in the Grove right now, The North End and the lot next to the old High School. They would make excellent parking lots, but that will never happen since they are too valuable to the township and the CMA for future ratables and condos, but they are also years away from fruition so they will remain vacant. Then again, maybe some sort of retail/parking structures could be designed? How about the retail/warehouse corridor along Main St. (rte 71)? Isn’t that an area ripe for redevelopment? New mixed retail/residential/parking sounds good to me and would improve the ‘look’ with some creative designs.
Ocean Grove’s streets were laid out in an era of few vehicles of any sort; no accommodations were made for the parking issues we face today. I don’t think meters are the way to go, but some sort of permit system should be implemented until some other ‘sane’ plan comes along. It’s the same way I feel about the building variances that seem to be freely issued to the developers. (Got to get a dig in, sorry!) Build and design according to the flare and height restrictions, no exceptions. Limited parking permits per household or building or Inn or whatever, no exceptions. It’s the ‘price’ or ‘sacrifice’ you make to live in the Grove.
Someone somewhere in the world must have some sort of creative solutions that can work for us here. Not everyone will be happy, but the status quo can’t be SOP anymore, there just isn’t enough room.
What about actually using the parking lot on the north end? Everyone commissions about parking, yet the CMA sits on a huge piece of land that gets no use in the summer. What about the old CMA building site? Is there a reason the pool is fenced in? Fill it, and make that whole area paid parking like on the south end
No way…..it is fall and I can’t get a spot close to my house now….if meters go in I will have to go to Asbury to park
You are missing the fact that during the summer months, when owners of summer residences are in town, Ocean Grove does not have enough spaces to accommodate owners and residents, much less visitors. There are too many apartment buildings and condos to issue parking permits, and there is a large overhead cost that goes with a program such as this.
The Neptune Township Police Department, the OG Parking Committee and the Township Committee have already stated their opposition to this idea, and we are not revisiting it. Trust me, if YOU had been hit in the head with a half-full bottle of water thrown by an anti-meter resident during the 2010 July 4 Parade, you would have the same harsh feelings about it being brought up again without any discussion with the folks who have the facts, not just opinions.
I remain opposed to meters for all of the reasons I’ve stated before. Again I stress that any meter/paid parking scheme would have to include resident parking and I would urge resident parking designated on one side of the street rather than just stickers, to save nearby parking for homeowners. Resident parking should not cost residents money; it should be free, residents should not have to pay for stickers. Such a fee would add insult to the already-existing injury that homeowners paying the highest property taxes per square foot in the area for land they do not own (sorry, but our sick property taxes are a relevant point here) can almost never park near their homes in the summertime.
You asked, “What do you think?” Here are my thoughts:
—The “cash cow” argument is invalid because meters will cost Ocean Grove taxpayers nothing. #### Don’t be fooled. Neptune will get the money from you through some tax bill, sewer bill, or some other means. Don’t you know them yet?
—If Grovers are issued stickers, then they can park for free in metered spots.##### Where? Certainly not by your home. Those spots will be taken by beachgoers.
—-There will be more spots for Grovers once errant parkers go back where they came from. #### How many–10? It’s never enough. THey added spots on Broadway 2 or 3 years ago and its never enough. ####In addition, justice is served because those outsiders who come to enjoy the Grove will contribute to the town’s upkeep.##### No, those who come to the beach bring their own food, leave their crap, then go home. They are not “shopping” up town. Most of them have kids and they go home from the beach.
—The meters will earn enough money to pay for themselves and add some needed dough for the Neptune Township coffers.#### No way would the Township admit that they pay for themselves. They would see an opportunity to cry about the cost of them and pass it on.
–“Ugly” is no longer an issue. Just go over to AP to see the pay stations. They are few and far between in the metered zones.#### They are ugly and certainly not Victorian — we are a National Historic Landmark and must keep within the confines of those restrictions.
Sorry! It’s a bad idea. And I thought the Twp. Committee said “there will be no more discussions about parking in Ocean Grove.”
######
What do you think? What am I missing?
To Frank S.
A Parking Meter Fee is a HIDDEN Tax.
So, let us say that it is targeted only to beach goers. Maybe it will cause them to go elsewhere, who knows. But, when they do go elsewhere; you loose the ancillary revenue to Ocean Grove businesses when they want to have something to eat.
All taxes, hidden or otherwise are regressive in nature.
To Paul Devine : When you are invited over someone’s house or to a party you typically bring or give something to the host. Think of the meters in that regard rather then as being an “affront.” Also keep in mind that these are guests/visitors who have invited themselves. Walking from OG to Asbury is good exercise. We all should do so more often. If you are dining out in AP with, say, 2 or 3 people you are going to be spending aprox. $100. So then what is 2 or 3 bucks for parking? That would really actually deter you?
To The Maxster : Maybe metering Main St./business area is not a good idea. However, to keep beachgoers from parking there, there should be, say, a 2-hour max. Meters should not be in force at night after dark. Yes indeed the economy is bad, which is exactly why Neptune Township needs to implement ways to raise money other then through tax increases.
Do you realize what an impediment to business parking meters are?
Parking fees for residents AND employees as Asbury does? Don’t say it couldn’t happen. Allowing O. Grovers to park free in a numbered spot is a logistical nightmare requiring MORE oversight.
People rushing their meals at restaurants because they are not sure if they put enough money in the meters? Paying a parking fee, let’s say of a dollar; just to stop in for Ice Cream at Nagles or Days?
And, as for ugly, few of those “nice pay stations” in Asbury are lighted, which means fumbling in the dark for money; exposed to criminal elements. As well, do you REALLY want to walk a few blocks for a pay station in the opposite direction of where you want to go?
IT’S A DEAD ECONOMY FOLKS, WILL BE FOR YEARS TO COME
It may not cost Ocean Grover’s directly, but it will cost Ocean Grove’s businesses dearly.
WHY NOT JUST WATCH AND STUDY TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS TO ASBURY PARK’S BUSINESSES FOR A YEAR OR SO, FIRST?
Maybe, just maybe; Ocean Grove might get an INFLUX of business to a more visitor friendly Ocean Grove without parking meters.
This community can’t even get local government to issue them parking places for residents who pay high taxes to live in Ocean Grove. Do that first.
Still opposed to meters. As residents we should continue to welcome all visitors without the affront of having to feed a meter. Recently the weather was rainy and we did not dine in Asbury, due to the meters. Last night dined in Asbury, as the weather was pleasant and we walked. Meters discourage us from dining out in Asbury. Was glad to see a new sidewalk on the Asbury side of the Jersey Ave bridge.
I would agree as long as meters were just East of Central Ave up to and including Ocean Ave. Maybe on Main too but undecided on that. We are just about the only town left in this stretch of the shore that does not meter. Also metering should only be from say 8am to say 6pm and only in season. Maybe hopefully revenue generated by metering would help lower/stabilize our high taxes although somehow I do not trust that would happen.
Missing are the details. For starters: Who can obtain how many stickers? How much will each cost? Where will the metered parking be? It is always in the details. This should be a lot of fun.
ken