Park View Inn rear view faces Wesley Lake. Two houses are proposed for that spot facing Lake Avenue. The building will be demolished. Blogfinger photo ©
We have a report from the Planning Board meeting last week where the Park View Inn owner asked that the site of the PVI be subdivided into 4 lots for single family homes. The Board voted to accept that subdivision plan, but a resolution needs to be passed, and there may be some controversial issues. For one, two of the houses will face Wesley Lake, but there is no street there. The Lake Avenue portion behind the PVI is not a street, so how do you build two homes where there is no street?
It’s a similar issue as the suggestion that condos might be built in the Pavilion building (“the White Whale” ) at the Boardwalk, which, incidentally is no street either.
Another issue is whether it is legal to place 4 houses on that lot. We will provide more information on this potentially problematic issue as we learn more about it.
Paul Goldfinger, Editor @Blogfinger.
SHE AND HIM:
I would contribute to a fund to pay for a lawyer. Probably for 15 hours of work, they could file for a special master with the State, develop a legal strategy for delay or outright victory, write some letters and appear once or twice at meetings at Neptune township. This would cost about $9K. I would provide $500 for this fund if someone would organize it and find a lawyer.
Waterseller. You are onto something. It would be poetic justice if the citizens of Ocean Grove could also have a lawyer; after all, all the other players in these local dramas have legal representation.
We the people should have a Federal program to provide lawyers to represent citizens for free when they are battling for their rights under the Constitution. We could call the program Lawyercare.
And Waterseller, I hope they make you the chairman of the legal selection committee if a group of activists ever emerges in this town.
First Mate Jack: You get shore leave, but be careful of those Ocean Grove girls in their grass skirts.
The Captain.
I should think a large, undivided lot like the one with the Parkview would be salable for a good-sized single family home — oh, I would love to have space for a proper garden and yard in OG! Something like the yellow house on the end of the street at Founder’s Park, or the Strandvue on Main & Ocean. Why must owners subdivide these grand lots?
Thank you Captain Paul, the Ship is proceeding smoothly.
Paul, the law firm used by Mr. Koplitz, Parkview former owner, was first rate. They fought Neptune to a standstill every time. Perhaps OG could get some positive results with them.
Jack. Thank you for your sage advice. I now appoint you the BF Editor-in-charge of making the hairs stand on-end over at the Mother Ship and at the lair of the Home Groaners Ass.
But ladies and germs : An insurrection is in order. There must be at least 500 current HOA members. Create a petition to force the OGHOA board to resign; replace them with a new volunteer Grovarian Home Guard; change the name to OG Residents United; raise the membership to 1500 OG residents who care more about the town than they do about how much a free parking sticker should cost; ask everyone who can to send in $20.00 or more; find an honorable lawyer who knows land use law and then start a suit that will get the attention of the HOA and the turkeys on Neptune Blvd.
We should force them to sign an oath on parchment (as was the Declaration of Independence) to respect the wishes of we the people!
Devo: Through a lawsuit in Superior Court or a request to the office of the New Jersey State Attorney General.I am sure the Home Owners Association would assist you. ( that would be their job).
How do we get a Master appointed? I’ll write a letter if you tell me who to write it to.
Penny: There is a systematic breakdown of Land Use administration in Neptune Township.
We should continue to respect Land Use Law even if the Committee doesn’t.
We need a State appointed Special Master to review all the violations of State law that have become “Business as usual”.
Ms Krimko: Thank you for joining our discussion on this subject. You are the only one from the Neptune authorities who has been willing to talk to our readers regarding the concerns about that Sea View/Lake Avenue property. Regardless of whether our readers agree or disagree with you, you bring a lucid and authoritative point of view to Blogfinger, and we hope that you will join us again in the future.
If the Township keeps making exceptions to the rules, then there really is no point in having rules.
Why should the public respect the town ordinances if the big shots make exceptions for their cronies, friends and monied interests?
Jennifer S Krimko:
1. A conforming lot in Ocean Grove is 30′ x 60′ and 1,800 square feet, or larger
2. The current lot is a conforming lot.
3. “A noncomforming lot” means a lot the area, dimension or location of which was lawful prior to the adoption, revision or amendment of a zoning ordinance, but fails to conform to the requirements of the zoning district in which it is located by reason of such adoption, revision or amendment.
4. When the Planning Board adopts its resolution, the four (4) new lots will not fit the definition of “conforming” lot or “nonconforming” lot.
5.That is why, it is my opinion the four (4) new lots will be “illegal” lots.
6. 40:55 D-35. Building Lot to Abut Street:
“No permit for the erection of any building or structure shall be issued unless the lot abuts a street given access to such proposed building or structure.”
7. As to variances, the applicant is creating his own hardship.
Ms.Krimko: I’m not surprised that you have found legal ways (ie loopholes) to make it OK to squeeze 4 undersized lots into that property. But that doesn’t mean that the Planning Board should allow it. Maybe they should be thinking about the impact on the homeowners who already live on that high density street.
If we have a width requirement of 30 feet, then why should that OG neighborhood be forced to accept 2 properties that are not wide enough to meet standards? What about the increased parking requirements on the street, the increased fire hazard, and the ugliness of narrow houses that will look like something out of a joke book (like the old woman who lived in a shoe) instead of something that matches other houses around there.
It’s about time that the powers-that-be do what’s best for the citizens of Ocean Grove who want an authentic historic district for our town. We the people should be the top priority and not the developers who want to make our “built-up” town even more crowded. Two single family houses sound right to me and, I would assume, would require no variances or easements.
1. Two lots would require the same lot width variance sought. 25 foot wide lots instead of 30 feet as required. That’s it.
2. No variances are being sought for setbacks or coverage.
3. These lots are not illegal. They are a few feet short on lot width, which is why variances were sought and granted. They all exceed the depth and could easily all meet the area requirement. The overall parcel has more than enough area for the four lots and meets the density requirement in the Ordinance. These lot sizes are exactly what the Ordinance contemplates…just a bit short on width due to the narrow and long nature of the overall parcel. It is for instances just like this that the Municipal Land Use Law provides for variance relief.
4. Access easements are being provided through the Sea View lots for the Lake Avenue lots. Moreover, while Lake Avenue is not designated as public right of way for vehicular access, it is a public walkway access.
In regards to the Park View, I was at the HPC meeting when they voted to allow the Park View to be demolished. The new owner was there also and he has plans to build 3 single family houses at the property. He has asked the neighbors on Sea View Avenue to review the plans when they are submitted to the town for approval.
(This comment was made previously by a resident of Sea View Ave.)
Sue: In 1879 the Camp Meeting Association (CMA) subdivided your Block (Block 103) into 7 conforming lots.
However, as the result of illegal subdivisions over the years, there are now 10 lots on your block. Three (3) are conforming undersized, and (3)are illegal lots that do not front on a street.
The current plan to subdivide (1) conforming lot into (4) undersized lots adds 3 more lots to the block. Two (2) are not fronting on a street and all four (4) are undersized.
The purpose of a zoning ordinance is to reduce rather than increase nonconformity.
Why? Because for one thing, if a house on a nonconforming lot is damaged more than 50%, the town can prevent the owner from rebuilding anything on the lot.
With a conforming lot, the town must let the owner rebuild.
You may be willing to take this chance, but I would not encourage the Planning Board to approve this possible nightmare for future OG residents.
Kevin Chambers has been ringing the alarm bell for years, but the Planning Board is still out to lunch.
Sue: But that’s not the point. Of course there are many small lots in Ocean Grove; some are just a half lot and share one lot with another home, and they are sometimes quite cute. But those homes are old and are grandfathered in. We are discussing new homes which should be according to the law. If some get special permissions, then all sorts of lot-sized mayhem could result. Why not stick to the rules for new houses? Why should some get special exceptions?
If the owner of that Sea View property should have two lots instead of four, then that’s how it should be. The fact that the owner is removing a big derelict eyesore is not reason to give him a pass. Squeezing houses into nonconforming spaces has repercussions having to do with fire hazards, flow of sea breezes, fresh air, ventilation, access to the alleys, crowded alleys, neighborhood congestion, cost of materials such as siding and windows, ugliness, parking density, blocked views, safety issues, access to light, etc. which could negatively affect adjacent properties and lifestyles in the neighborhood.
Why should these special privileges be given? it’s just another variation on the condo theme. When will the public interest prevail in this town? When will representative government prevail? It stinks! We will soon post a piece about how that stuff occurs and what some of you think about it.
My lot is 17×56, next door is 13×54. I have no problem with non-conforming lots, as long as the setbacks are respected and not waived for new construction. Many of the small houses with character in OG are on lots under 30×60.
I’m sure a builder will do these lots justice and be a welcome addition to town versus the blight that we now know as the Park View.
The North side of town was laid out in the time before the horseless carriage. I’ve see no evidence of even a remotely intelligent parking plan since since that time.
OhGee: Lake Avenue is not an existing street or a paper street. It is a lot, (block 101, lot 2) under the Green Acre Program and is reserved as a public walkway. The few dozen homes you mention, are on legal nonconforming lots, subdivided in 1879.
The proposed subdivision will result in 4 illegal lots. Whoever purchases them could have big problems in the future, and the Neptune Township Planning Board doesn’t give a flying fig.
I can understand the opposition of dividing the land into 4 separate lots as the space may be too small to do so. However I don’t understand the opposition to 2 houses being built on the paper street. There is a few dozen existing homes already facing Wesley Lake said paper street. People sell/buy them all the time, like any other house in OG.
To Paulie D, Devo, and ALL Blogfinger readers:
Writing to Blogfinger is important. Enclosed are e-mail addresses easily CC’d to while you respond to Blogfinger. It takes seconds to do so! When the crap hits the fan, it not only affects Team OG, or Blogfinger, but it hits us all.
So also please write governing representatives as well!
The accolades for those who STAND UP needs TOO… all of us behind them. NOT JUST THEIR SHADOWS! AND BET YOUR BOTTOM DOLLAR TEAM OG, and Blogfinger, would not hesitate to appreciate BACK-UP!
Please copy your responses to appropriate office holders at:
http://www.neptunetownship.org/contact-us/township-directory.
Department of Community Affairs for RSIS
John.Lago@dca.nj.gov
Joel T. Scranton
Agree with PD:
Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
Thanks Paulie D.
At Blogfinger we ascribe to the Paul Revere school of journalism. (He was also a member of the Paul Society)
The only thing I am an expert on is cardiology. So, in doing our thing on Blogfinger, we try to bring up news and issues and then we hope that citizen reporters and commenters will help generate information and dialogues.
You might recall that Paul Revere rode around on his horse (these days we ride our computer) and told the local militias that the British were coming. Revere was a silversmith. He was no expert on military theory or strategy. He couldn’t shoot straight, but there were patriots out there who could.
So as he rode his horse across the Massachusetts landscape he did his part to stimulate change and victory.
Some Grovers don’t understand that about BF, but when they get it, we hope that they will join our conversations and help out in any way they can: spreading the word, doing some research, sending us information and becoming interested in public issues.
We welcome citizen experts like Jack and Kevin, and, in this age of Instagram, Twitter and Facebook, we welcome your passing our posts and your opinions along on social media and sending us photographs from around town.
In the end, like Paul Revere, we want to stimulate participation, action, change, and transparency. —–Paulie G
Blogman, You are doing an impressive job on reporting zoning issues and inconsistencies. Kudo’s to Jack Bredin and Kevin Chambers for keeping the ball rolling. You are the vigilant watchmen of Ocean Grove!
Good luck selling those homes. No place to park, and you have to lug your groceries if you are lucky enough to steal a space on the the fourth of July. They will sit on the market for years as empty ghost pavilions. All the neighbors adore the single-family home concept, and I hope they love the ghost town they are creating.
We are just creating a space for investors and uber-wealthy who will be down for one weekend a year. A lack of imagination can have a price. That price is no actual people.
David, the answer is no. You do not get to subdivide your conforming lot into 2 or 4 non-conforming lots. That would be against the law.
But, you would increase your chances of getting that subdivision if you hire a politically connected attorney who can trot out a professional planner who is willing to lie to the Board under oath.
You must first make a campaign contribution.
No one forced the owner to buy these properties. If they are not proper size for single family residences then tough luck. One home per 30 X 60 lot.
I live on a slightly less then double deep lot on Lake Ave. If this goes through then do I get to sub-divide?
I would like to make it clear that I did not oppose the Park View property being divided into four lots even though the lots will be nonconforming. Historically, four lots would have originally existed on this property and as it stands, the square footage exceeds what was permitted for four historical OGCM Assoc. lots. In this case, the replacement of the existing building with four houses is more desirable and with legal zoning should have been permitted.
My issue is with the fact that the same attorney for both the Warrington application and the Park View application can, with the approval of the two boards, present evidence that clearly contradicts each other. If one is telling the truth, than the other must be lying. That is indisputable!
You cannot present testimony at one board that Lake Avenue is a street, and at the next present testimony that it is not. You cannot present testimony at one hearing that for a hotel to be reopened you need a conditional use application, which is a requirement of our zoning, and for the same hotel use you don’t. For one, the testimony needed parking, but for the other, it wasn’t required.
The attorneys and the planners have the obligation to the public to make sure that testimony is factual, consistent and truthful. In one of these two cases it is anything but that.
As much as I agree that the double lot is too small for 4 homes, many of us on Seaview signed a petition in support of the subdivision knowing that 4 single homes are better than condos or a hotel.
We are hoping and some have recommended that the builder won’t build the 4 and will opt for less. If it is 4 homes, they will be quite narrow and the owners of the lakefront homes will have to walk through on a path (easement) and park on Seaview or Central.
The owner of the property has been very forthcoming and respectful of neighbors, so let’s see what happens as he begins to build. I think those of us on Seaview are very happy that the Parkview is coming down soon.
More troubling now is the Warrington in terms of parking, garbage, signage, noise, occupancy, privacy, etc.
This is outrageous, and Kevin and Jack are right. No way is it OK to put 4 houses on that property. In fact, even two houses should be turned down by the Planning Board. There should only be one single family house over there due to the lot size. Minimum lot size in OG is 30×60
Lake Avenue is a walking path. It is not a street, and historically it is not a street. And the entire length of Lake Avenue, including the part that will contain condos under the illegal North End Plan is not a street, no matter what the Neptune engineer says.
The people of Ocean Grove are being plundered, just as if the Vikings returned from Iceland and landed on the shores of Ocean Grove.
Even the Township Committee cannot question the great and powerful Wizard. Only he knows what is best for the residents of Ocean Grove, and Board members must “go along to get along”.
That is why most residents prefer to stay at home and watch ” Dancing with the Stars”, then to attend a Township meeting and have their rights trampled on if they disagree with the Wizard’s vision of developing more tax ratables by transforming OG into the “Riviera” on the Jersey Shore.
But, who is the man behind the curtain? Who knows? Only the Shadow knows.
What we do know is :
-The Township Committee has no heart.
-The Planning Board has no brain and,
-the OGHOA have no courage.
They all just “go along” with the “Flat Earth Society” opinions from the Township’s professional planners and engineers who most likely were referred to Neptune by the Great Wizard.
The fact is, we have no idea who is running (ruining) our town.
But, when we find out, we will recommend their appointment to the Asbury Park Planning Board, and I will consider filing a complaint to both the State Board of Professional Planners and Professional Engineers.
The lots are undersized.
There are even more troubling questions. When the Warrington was in front of the Board of Adjustment, the testimony was that Lake Avenue was a street. How is it that one expert for the same attorney, at one board can claim Lake Ave. is a street, and the next claims, at a different board hearing, it’s not.
Also, this newest expert claimed that a conditional use would have been required for the Park View, but no conditional use was sought for the Warrington or required.
These are just two of the many troubling questions as to how the laws are treated from board to board. There is no consistency for zoning or testimony. Anything can be stated at these boards without the requiring of establishing the true facts. Our experts and boards should be using the same facts and using the same zoning requirements for each board hearing—–not any wild statement based on the whims of the applicant for that night.
Sounds pretty inconvenient for the two houses on the lake. Either they will have to cut through their neighbor’s yard or walk around. None too convenient for bringing in the groceries.
Also, is that really a double-wide lot? Looks like 1.5 wide at the most.