By Charles Layton
On Thursday, under legal pressure, the owner of one of Ocean Grove’s worst derelict houses agreed in court to correct all outstanding maintenance violations — except for painting — within one week. The court gave him a longer deadline, 90 days, to get the painting done.
The agreement did not address whatever problems may exist in the interior of the unoccupied house at 24 McClintock Street, although those problems may be extensive. Asked about those problems, the owner’s attorney, Jennifer Krimko said, “We don’t know yet what we’re going to do for the future. All we know is we’re going to be compliant with the agreement.”
Neighbors petitioned the Township about 24 McClintock last June, saying the place was an eyesore and that they feared a fire might break out and spread to other homes. Later that month, owner Jason Richelson of Brooklyn, NY, entered into a court agreement in which he paid a $1,000 fine and promised to correct all maintenance violations within six months. That deadline expired the last week of December, with no repairs having been made.
On Thursday, the Township’s attorney, Gene Anthony, told Municipal Court Judge Robin Wernik that progress had been made in recent days, but “I still feel he’s in violation.” After Richelson admitted to Wernik that he had violated his June agreement, she accepted a new plea agreement under which Richelson was fined an additional $500, he promised to have the house painted within 90 days, and he promised to have all other required maintenance work to the house’s exterior completed within one week. Krimko said the longer deadline for painting was necessary because of the weather.
About two weeks ago, with a new court date having been scheduled, maintenance work was finally begun on the home, including the repair of windows and the front porch. Krimko said Thursday that Richelson has also received the Historic Preservation Commission’s permission to repaint the house in the same existing shade of light blue.
Lynn Merry, who collected 29 names of concerned neighbors on a petition last spring, was in the courtroom during the hearing. She said she viewed the plea agreement as “positive progress, assuming he follows through with the outside repairs.” However, she said, “As I see it, we still have a potential fire hazard back there. It remains an abandoned house. A new coat of paint will not make me feel any safer.”
The original list of maintenance violations cited by Neptune Code Enforcement included broken windows, rotted porch posts and other structural members, broken shingles, damaged eaves, door and window frames in disrepair, loose and rotting materials on exterior walls, and problems with gutters and downspouts.
Even if all the cited problems are corrected, the future of 24 McClintock remains in doubt. No Township official has ever inspected the building’s interior, and since the house has stood unoccupied and in disrepair for years, its interior problems are thought to be serious. An ad for the property on the real estate site Zillow.com contains this caveat for potential buyers: “Only builders should consider [buying this property] because it needs to be rebuilt completely.” Local builder/realtor Jack Green, who used to be the agent for this property, told us: “The whole house is gutted on the inside. It’s just two-by-fours.”
There is a sign on the front of the house that reads “For Sale By Owner” and gives a New York City phone number.
I happen to know that 24 McClintock doesn’t have a Certificate of Occupancy. It didn’t have one when it was sold to the current owners and it does not have one now. It really needs a thorough inspection to ensure that it’s not a hazard to its neighbors.
Good point Bythesea, getting “homes in extreme need of paint” painted should be much easier for the Township to make happen in less time than that rigamorole of Demo by Neglect stuff. Simply a visual curbside inspection by the right official should start the ball rolling.
If they can require the owner to paint the house, I can think of 3 other OG homes that are in extreme need of paint (because they essentially have none). Can someone tell me if badly needing paint is an enfoceable offense? If so, under what circumstances? It would be great if owners of houses in extreme need of painting could be compelled to do so.