Paul Goldfinger, Editor @Blogfinger
At the last meeting of the OGHOA, a presentation was made by the HOA regarding RSIS. All of a sudden, these folks became experts when they ignored the issue for years.
Fran of OG advised us that the HOA Power Point slide-show regarding RSIS can be found on their web site (OGHOA.org). That presentation is long and convoluted, but the first slide stands out:
As you can see, they say, “Parking in Ocean Grove is NOT governed by RSIS” If that is true, then why has Neptune Twp. applied on two occasions in recent years for an exemption if they are already exempted?
Consider this excerpt from an exceptional RSIS review on Blogfinger by journalist Charles Layton on Feb. 14, 2011:
“On January 25, 2005, Neptune received a letter from the state Division of Codes and Standards pointing out the obvious — that our local ordinance violates the RSIS and is therefore legally invalid. However, the letter said Neptune could apply for special permission, in the form of what’s called a “special area standard.”
On October 26, 2007, Neptune did apply. It asked the New Jersey Site Improvement Advisory Board, which enforces RSIS, to let it retain its own separate regulations. Its application laid out all the arguments mentioned above.
On February 21, 2008 and again on September 18, 2008 the board held hearings on Neptune’s request.
On September 29, 2009, Neptune received a letter from the chairman of the board stating that there was insufficient evidence to justify a special standard for Ocean Grove. This letter reiterated that the Neptune ordinance was inconsistent with the RSIS and therefore invalid. However, the letter said the board was “willing to work with the Township” if it decided to submit a new or different request.
During all these years of negotiation, of course, quite a number of residences have been built in Ocean Grove, on Ocean Pathway and elsewhere. According to the RSIS law, those residences should have included off-street parking. But, because the buildings followed Neptune’s law rather than state law, no such parking was provided. In fact, by local law, the builders were forbidden to have off-street parking even if they’d wanted it.”
Here is a link to that entire article:
Is Kevin Chambers Right? Are Ocean Grove’s Latest Condo Developments Illegal? Let’s Figure It Out.
Last November, Kevin Chambers wrote an article for BF (based on a 2011 article by him) on this subject, and he said, “Even though all the committee members of the RSIS Board were well aware of Ocean Grove’s problems having visited Ocean Grove, the RSIS Board was forced to deny Neptune the “Special Area Standard” designation since Neptune’s zoning for Ocean Grove was and is in violation of the MLUL.” (MLUL is the Municipal Land Use Law of New Jersey.)
Kevin Chambers Comments About Parking in the Grove (2011 post on Blogfinger)
Support Jack Bredin’s motion and vote YES at the meeting next Saturday.
PEGGY LEE “Is That All There Is?”
I would like to vote on the motion on Saturday but it is Easter and I am with family. Why is the vote only with members present. Also, I would like to see the results of the parking survey that was polled some time ago. I would like to see what OG residents said.
TOMAS: We have been trying to figure that out as well. It makes no sense to us. One of our rules on BF is not to speculate on motives. On the other hand, if truth is revealed, then motives become fair game. Anybody from that organization want to tell us the truth?
Can someone please explain what HOAs motivation is? Are they pro-development of condos? Are they unconcerned about the parking situation? Surely they must care about the fact that there is already inadequate parking 4 months a year everywhere and 12 months a year next to AP. Aren’t HOA leaders and members residents of OG?
I just don’t understand.
The HOA is playing word games in an effort to disguise the truth about this topic. They would like us to believe that RSIS is all about parking rules such as how many inches from the curb you must be when you park.
Those sorts of rules are governed by the Township and have nothing to do with RSIS, but this debate is about the RSIS rules that deal with required off street parking when a developer wants to build a residential structure.
The truth that the HOA is evading is about how the RSIS exemption will affect land use and life styles in OG for years to come, and especially about whether we will have multifamily condos out the wazoo—-all over town in the future.
So don’t be fooled by the HOA propaganda/double talk. Unless you want our town to be overrun by condos or by buildings such as Mary’s Place and unless you want us to become a congested mess, devoid of character and history, go to that meeting on Saturday and support Jack Bredin.
The Spring equinox arrived in Ocean Grove on March 20, bringing new growth, more sunshine and positive energies.
It could not have come at a better time for the OGHOA meeting scheduled for March 26 at 10 a.m. in the Community Room.
I seriously think that all vehicles of any kind be removed from Ocean Grove and never allowed in again.
When the Township sought the Special Area Standard from the RSIS Board, the Township Planner made it clear that the Township’s zoning was not in compliance with the MLUL (Municipal Land Use Law.) Before the Township can approve any parking standards for on-street parking, it first must bring its zoning into compliance with the state mandated parking requirements within the zoning for OG.
The Township has refused to do just that and continues to defy the law. The issue isn’t the Township applying for the Special Area Standard. The issue is that the Township is defying the law.
The RSIS Board has instructed the Township not to reapply until it brings its zoning into conformity. Until then the Township’s Attorneys, as officers of the court, should be enforcing the law—-meaning RSIS parking requirements. That is not being done.
Two past Board of Adjustment members who were at the last OGHOA meeting admitted that they had not been following the law for any of the OG Variance applications that had come before them at the Board of Adjustment even though they knew it was required by law. This has denied the public a fair hearing. This has permitted an incomplete record. This is subverting and circumventing the law. These are the real issues here. This is what the OGHOA should be dealing with—-this serious violation of our rights and the law.
I thought a couple of other things were interesting about those OGHOA slides:
Slide 6 focuses on N.J.A.C. 5:21-4.14(f) of RSIS, which says, “When, in the judgment of the local approving authority, on-street parking is available,then only that proportion of the parking requirement which is not available on the street shall be provided in off-street parking facilities…”. Wasn’t that part of the Neptune Township planner’s argument, that they calculated that there’s adequate on-street parking now and, since the town is “built out” now, the town doesn’t anticipate the need for additional parking?
On slide 7, it says that the town applied for the Special Area Standard, in part, “…to reflect and legalize actual conditions in Ocean Grove.” So whoever created these slides is acknowledging that what’s currently going on is illegal.