This is the Aurora which went from a hotel to a single family residence. That was in keeping with the future of Ocean Grove as has been the understanding in town. Blogfinger file photo.
By Paul Goldfinger, Editor @Blogfinger
If Mary’s 9,000 square foot 2 1/2 story “Victorian” facility is built on those two merged lots on one of the Grove’s most important historic streets, then that place will join an exclusive club consisting of two properties. The other one is the gray “Victorian” building on Ocean Avenue which some call a “Greek Temple” while others call it “The Bank.” Mary’s Place will get its own nickname eventually.
When people walk by Mary’s Place, they won’t admire its beauty; instead they will ask, “Who was responsible for allowing this out-of-place building to be constructed in this quaint, historic, residential town? ” They will ask why two fine Victorian single family houses were not placed there instead, like we now have on the Pathway. And they will see the parking problems and congestion due to the 10 clients staying there, the staff who will be needed to maintain the place, the visitors, and the rest of the support team who teach yoga, etc. Then there will be the deliveries, laundry trucks, garbage pickups, etc.
This quickly arranged project will become an endless fountain of frustration and cynicism for citizens who are made to jump through hoops and experience long delays to get permission for projects at their homes in town. Historians will wonder what happened to the idea that the future of Ocean Grove will be more single family houses. And for those who worry about the consistent and fair enforcement of ordinances and statutes, they will wonder how this project got shoehorned into the state definitions for community residences and shelters.
It is clear from the Blogfinger readers’ comments and our poll that many Grovers want an independent look at this Mary’s Place zoning decision. The rush to break ground in October means that any opposition must occur now. The only way to stop it is for a lawyer who represents the citizens to take it to court and request an order to “show cause.” The goal would be a temporary restraint to halt any work (order to cease and desist) while a judge reviews the statutes and decides if the zoning officer read the statute too broadly in allowing this project and to decide if proper procedures were utilized. The judge can then have time to arrange a hearing to evaluate the facts. This way the citizens will get an impartial evaluation of the situation.
Who will take the lead on this legal effort? It could be the Township Committee, representing the citizens, and asking the Township attorney to go to court and get the cease and desist order. The Committee can do this because they were not involved in the zoning decision.
The other possibilities include the OG Home Owners Association hiring a lawyer on behalf of the homeowners in town , or an individual or group of citizens can band together and represent the rest of us. They could, if needed, do a fund raiser for legal fees. Where are the Main Avenue neighbors on this controversy?
This project, if allowed to go forward, threatens the town of Ocean Grove, because it indicates that our town values are open to compromise and are not trustworthy. This translates into potential effects on town pride, real estate values, and future similar projects that will point to this precedent as reason for their own projects to be approved.
.
Hi Paul: If we go to court before Judge Lawrence Lawson, it would be a waste; He was mayor of Neptune and always sides with Neptune. He should not be allowed to hear cases from Neptune.
Paul your editorial was “spot on” as the younger generation would say. How can we get Township Committee to act as you suggested? Props to for telling it like it is. I am very worried if this goes thru (shudder) and the precedent it would set.
It appears that this project needs closer scrutiny than it has had. It may be a very good cause,but if we overlook the law for one site, then what will slip by next time?
Take a look at 27 Surf Ave. which had very little interest by most citizens until it was too late. Certainly this project should have required some sort of variances from the Bd.of Adjustment
It seems to me that Mary’s Place has had several temporary locations in OG. It seemed most worthy a project when that effort fit into the existing housing and clearly was part of the town’s traditional architecture and spirit of restoration – the old location on Ocean Avenue comes to mind.
Regarding neighbors- truth be told, some of us came back this summer to new signs installed on that vacant lot and nary a legal notice regarding a variance issue or request, which one normally would expect,if Kevin Chambers is correct. Until this spring “the neighbors” had anticipated seeing two classic Victorians occupy that space, like the one right behind on Heck that was recently built.
Paul, your article is hard hitting and raises many issues and concerns, particularly parking challenges that drive us crazy on that corner so close to the beach. Trucks, visitors, and the like all make for a mean combination of issues that should concern all of us.
Also the idea of having a quasi-medical facility offering up western and alternative medicine does extend the original notion of Mary’s Place, does it not?
You also show a picture of the Aurora, and give a brief note on its conversion history. My understanding is that it is for sale. Might that not be a reasonable location for Mary’s Place. Fact is, Mary’s Place, as initially conceived, seems to be a most worthy undertaking. But instead of building a new place from the ground up, why not look at the many abandoned or vacant houses around, take them over and use funds to renovate them. There has to be some old house that is crying out for restoration and an opportunity to serve women in need of a place for respite by the sea.
Ocean Grove was founded on the tradition of being a place to restore the spirit, and certainly one would think that we could find a home for a place that serves this purpose. But we could also do this without violating the traditions and creating antagonisms between neighbors.
A project that intends to do so much good should not start of by antagonizing so many. And certainly it should not add to the woes of neighbors and the town. I am sure that there is a resolution out there somewhere. We hope.
We don’t want or need neighbors like this Mary’s Place organization. If they get away with this sneaky subversion of our zoning, and actually build a huge building, then we should agressively picket out front and make them and their guests feel unwelcomed. Why can’t people just respect this town and follow the rules?
Both lot 579 and lot 581 are both under sized lots. Both require a variance to build. If legally combined, the then single lot still fails to meet the requirement of 36,000 square feet required for the proposed use and still needs variance approval.
The court has consistently held that municipal action in the land use control field taken in direct violation of law or without legal authority is void from the beginning and has no legal intended result… nor, in deference may a property owner, by unilateral action, secure a valid nonconforming use based on a violation of the zoning ordinance.
Mr. Waterman has not only violated the law by refusing to require the owner of the property to go before the Board of Adjustment for the use of two nonconforming lots, he has violated our civil rights to a public hearing that is required by law.
If the Township fails to take proper action as to Mr. Waterman’s illegal action it will be opening itself to a major law suit at the tax payers expense.
A few major considerations:
1. The owners of “The Bank” on Ocean Avenue recently sponsored a fund-raiser at that “residence” for Mary’s Place. Here we go again the unfortunate reality of so-called “local power.”
2. The “neighbors” who should be reacting, for the most part, are consolidated in the always-when-it-comes-to-these civic issues silent OG Chamber of Commerce.
3. And unfortunately, when it comes to the OG Camp Meeting Assn., it abdicates its landlord position when it comes to the quality of everyone’s life in Ocean Grove.
The OGCMA has no role in zoning, and I have never known them to get involved with Neptune Township governance decisions.
Having only purchased my home a few weeks ago, I would wager that I am one of the newest Ocean Grovers to chime in, so forgive my naivete. What role could the Camp Meeting Association play in this matter? The developer’s of Mary’s Place, like the rest of us, merely holds a leasehold interest in the property.
Does this fact have any impact on liberties the Zoning Officer has taken with his interpretation of the Statute? Does the OGCMA have any ability to slow up the project for their closer inspection?
Right on Paul!
Well stated Paul. Having lived down the street form the “Greek Victorian” I can tell you this seems like the same sort of behind the scenes deal that probably got that monstrosity “approved” 15 years ago. I am suspicious deals that violate “Sunshine” requirements.