Here’s a good solution for the parking problem in Ocean Grove: Fill up the downtown with British sports cars and girls. Blogfinger photo. ©
By Paul Goldfinger, Editor and Jack Bredin, Reporter/researcher @ Blogfinger.
June 14, 2016. Ocean Grove, NJ. Last night’s parking workshop at the Neptune Township Committee was supposed to “educate the members of the Committee” regarding the OGHOA’s parking proposals. The HOA Parking Committee asked for Grovers to “urgently” attend and “pack the house to show support for the recommendations,” but as it turned out, those Grovers who came must have wished that they stayed home.
Yes, the place was “packed,” but the Neptuners acted as if the group’s recommendations didn’t exist. The HOA seemed to think that their proposals would be rubber stamped, but no such luck. Evidently our HOA representatives are clueless at to how local politics work.
The parking “workshop” lasted for about 45 minutes, and the HOA position was not thoroughly presented; the packed-people had nothing to do but squirm. No member of the audience was recognized to speak, although that usually is the case at workshops. A few HOA members got to jump up at their seats and make disjointed statements; it was a bit of a “free-for-all.”
The Neptune Committee evidently did not review the HOA provisions but instead belittled the effort. This was despite the fact that the Parking Committee’s findings had been given to them 2 months ago. The HOA was upset that their committee was not being taken seriously.
Randy Bishop, Committeeman, was dismissive when he said, “This is not exactly a new problem. I was on five other parking subcommittees, and there was no solution.”
Evidently the HOA did not make sure that there was an outcome at hand for the meeting. Instead Bishop suggested that dumpsters should be removed from town to make more room for parking on weekends. Another suggestion was to close the Wesley Lake bridges two hours earlier. And yet another suggestion, shot from the hip, was to have drunk driving checkpoints leaving the Grove—quite intoxicating as parking solutions go.
As for the parking stickers and the parking meters along Ocean Avenue and Broadway, those high profile topics were not addressed in any detail. In fact, none of the Parking Committee’s details were debated.
Bishop also spoke for the Committee in suggesting that a new parking sub-committee be formed that would consist of one HOA member, an engineer, a planner and two Committeemen. Mayor McMillan agreed, patronizingly saying, “We will do what’s best for Ocean Grove.” The Mayor had hoped to delay the discussion altogether because Carol Rizzo wasn’t there, but Carol Rizzo is not the Ocean Grove representative on the Committee. Neptune’s local government doesn’t work that way.
This new sub-committee suggestion was hardly worthwhile for anyone in the crowd who expected that the HOA proposals would be praised and passed. Under these conditions, the appointment of another committee sounds like another tombstone on the road to a parking solution.
However, in retrospect, the HOA Parking Committee should have never been formed without at least one professional (engineer and/or planner) on board.
The workshop meeting was quite bizarre because it began early, 5 pm, and ended after 45 minutes without any questions at the microphone from the audience. It was to be about parking in OG, but it failed to deal with parking in any meaningful and organized way. Only three committeemen were present (a quorum) , and Ocean Grove’s Carol Rizzo was absent during the workshop.
She showed up during Part II, which began at 7 pm but left shortly after with Randy Bishop to attend a memorial service for Orlando’s victims.
The 7 pm regular Committee meeting ended about 20 minutes after it began, because there was no quorum after Bishop and Rizzo left. Many Grovers came back later for part II in hopes of having something to say about parking, but they were astonished to find the meeting had ended.
This parking meeting was a waste of time, and the Home Groaners Ass., guilty of wishful thinking, needs to take responsibility for the fiasco.
Because the meeting was so ludicrous, here is a theme song for the event.
JUDY COLLINS:
Olivia. Our article is self explanatory. You are welcome to offer your version of the events.
As for your specific question as to our source of information, this article is signed by two of our reporters using their real names. That is all you need to know.
But I would like to ask you a question. What is your real name? —-Paul
Editor’s note: Olivia tells us her name is Olivia Burns.
Although this comment is somewhat late, I was actually present at the parking workshop and the regular meeting that followed and wish to clear up a few things:
– Neither the parking committee nor the OGHOA ever gave residents the impression that the workshop would result in their plans being “rubber stamped” or passed by the end of that meeting.
– The goal of the workshop was to allow the township committee adequate time to ask questions regarding the proposals, which they requested. Time for the public to speak was, as usual, reserved for the regular meeting at 7pm.
– The time which the public was allowed to speak was not only cut significantly short because Committee Members Bishop and Rizzo left to attend a vigil for the victims of Orlando, but during that period, it appeared that those residents who came to speak on behalf of the OGHOA plans were deliberately ignored.
– I was not aware during the meeting that Mr. Bredin, or any reporter from Blogfinger, was in attendance? Is this the case? If so, I’m interested to know where this reporting comes from.
Finally, the argument that the OGHOA parking committee deserves your and your readers’ ire because they are guilty of “wishful thinking” is thin at best.
It’s great to see such an important issue being discussed on a unique forum like Blogfinger, but I would hope that discussion remains factual. Furthermore, I am confident that any resident at all, member of the OGHOA or not, who has a workable idea re: parking would be welcomed by the members of the parking committee and the OGHOA more generally.
Fran Hopkins, I believe the HOA’s part of a quid pro quo, was to deliver to the Township Committee, within their cart-full of parking recommendations, a plan to develop part of Lake Ave. into a municipal street needed for the North End. The HOA would get reserved on-street-parking for condo owners (it was part of the HOA’s Power Point presentation.)
When the HOA didn’t deliver, things went south.
It really does look like the Township Committee has no interest in solving Ocean Grove’s parking problems. They had the OGHOA parking committee’s recommendations for two months. During that time, why didn’t the Committee advise the HOA if the recommendations were lacking in some way or couldn’t be acted upon because of x or y? Why didn’t the Committee tell the HOA that, regardless of its committee’s recommendations, the Township Committee would need to form its own Committee to study them?
On the other hand, did the OGHOA follow up with the Committee during that time to see if everything the Committee needed was there or if supplementary material was required? Why was the HOA totally caught off guard by the way things unfolded on June 13? Were there no communications between the groups for two months?
It makes me think that neither side feels any real sense of urgency about the issue. I felt much more urgency at the Easter weekend HOA meeting about confusing members into quashing Jack Bredin’s motion to exempt only single family homes from RSIS standards. As it turns out, that effort just ensured more months of delay and indecision.
It appears that neither group is either able or willing to do something effective to address parking problems in Ocean Grove. I can only conclude that those who run the town have something to gain by continuing to permit the addition of residential construction without parking; perhaps the HOA has its own reasons for not wishing to confront the town. Something is clearly more important to town leaders than Ocean Grove’s parking problems. I’m pessimistic that anything helpful will come of yet another parking committee, but I truly hope I’m wrong.
OhGee. If you read the article, you will find criticisms of both the HOA and the Township Committee. This whole process has, so far, been a failure.
Every nearby town (BB, Avon, Belmar) has some form of paid parking on Ocean Avenue and, in some cases, on adjacent streets. Sorry but If you choose to own or rent a home across the street from the beach, but this is the reality. Whichever proposals deemed to be best benefit the largest amount of Ocean Grovers will win my vote.
I also agree with Curmudgeon. You are pointing the blame at the OGHOA instead of the Neptune Township Committee. the NT Committee members had plenty of time to review and discuss amongst themselves the OGHOA proposals. They easily could have picked what they felt were the best ideas and assigned an engineer, police, etc. to continue to work with the existing OGHOA committee. Instead they basically thumbed their noses at them.
Mr. Bishop stated he has been on 5 past parking committees; this should be incredibly embarrassing to himself—-so much involvement, yet zero solutions activated?
So a word of advice to the OGHOA – Don’t have Bishop join your committee. As a B &B owner in addition to being an elected official, one would think he would have a heavily vested interest to implement substantial parking improvements.
Residential permits would encourage year-round residences and discourage seasonal rentals. Not only would the streets still have no available parking, but parking would become harder in the off season as more homes are rented year round or owner occupied. In addition, there will be twelve month demands on town services instead of three months per year. Seasonal renters and day trippers also do not have children in the Neptune school system. Because of the size of the lots, only banning of all non-residential parking would create easily available parking. It would also destroy local businesses and create an atmosphere of exclusion that counters the temperament of Ocean Grove that most of us were attracted to in the first place.
I am not saying nothing can be done. Certainly banning further increases in density would help (an idea never well received by the town council nor the OGCMA). However making changes without anticipating effects might actually increase the problem.
Parking meters work in other towns because they have off street parking for residents. Parking on residential streets in OG with meters would still be difficult however now it would be also expensive. It would be the equivalent of raising property taxes with little to no increase of parking.
The only thing new here is that Wegmans dinners are now $7.00! 😃
Frustrated, I agree that paid parking needs to be implemented. Asbury’s continually growing population will only worsen Ocean Grove’s available parking, in which can negatively effect Ocean Grove’s popularity.
I also agree with a point that Concerened Resident made, in which OGHOA needs to present plans that have been researched, with guidance from police, planners, engineers, State of NJ, and other professionals to guide the big decisions if meters and permits. Presenting ideas are great, but you need the research to back it up, in order to persuade & execute.
OGHOA, time to do your Homework and prepare to present again.
Concerned Resident, with all due respect, it is you who is being naive here. To suggest that proposals like permits and parking meters be abandoned simply because they will cost money and effort to implement is ludicrous. Most other shore towns have somehow managed to deploy them (face it, parking meters more than pay for themselves very quickly).
The Township Committee is clearly not putting any effort at all into addressing this problem. Randy Bishop should show us the findings from the previous five parking subcommittees that he says he has been on. I’m betting that not much real work was ever done.
The problem is getting significantly worse as Asbury’s popularity grows. The Township is also missing out an obvious new revenue opportunity, which hurts all of us. Paid parking would force many outsiders back to Asbury and actually clear more room for those wishing to attend Camp Meeting summer events.
To argue that nothing should be done because addressing the problem will take some actual thought is a lazy and ultimately destructive position.
The parking problem is a long time issue in Ocean Grove and there is not going to be an easy fix.
The OGHOA is very naive to think that they are going to make big changes like parking meters and permitted parking in Ocean Grove overnight and expect everyone to jump on board including the Township. The OGHOA was very ambitious in taking on this project but in reality it is going to take time to figure out a solution if one is available.
They need dollar amounts for the cost of their plan as well as input from police, planners, engineers, State of NJ, and other professionals to guide the big decisions of meters and permits.
At the meeting, when the Township offered some possible ways to find solutions like cracking down on overnight commercial vehicle parking, the OGHOA should have been more gracious in accepting these as useful ideas instead of casting them off. Screaming at them-not very professional.
The residents that would be directly effected by parking meters definitely don’t want them. (Ocean Ave. and Broadway,) and the one parking permit per household idea is not realistic. There are way too many households for this to work.
Regarding the OGCMA, whether you agree with them or not, they and their events are what makes this town special. So if you move into Ocean Grove, the parking problems come with the turf.
The OGHOA should not try to jam meters and permits down our throats without considering the big picture of Ocean Grove with its unique characteristics. The OGHOA is being very naive and aggressive, and they are not very respective to Neptune Township or the residents of Ocean Grove.
Dr. Carol, the proposal is for metered parking on the east side of Ocean Avenue, not the west. There is no parallel parking on the east side. So no spaces would be lost there.
Further, the two south-side blocks of Broadway detailed in the proposal are also currently angled parking. So no spaces would be lost there either.
The big concern is that the Township Committee is not taking this problem seriously, and it seems like many of its members have not even read the proposal.
Grover666: Your assumptions regarding whether the CMA would want parking meters are based on no facts. On the contrary, there is reason to believe that they would be opposed to the idea.
Meters on a parallel-parking street such as the west side of Ocean Ave. will reduce the number of spaces because lines must be drawn to mark the spaces. We all know that by Saturday night, all the cars in OG are pulled so tightly together that it’s sometimes difficult to get out of a space. The minimum legal length of a parking space is 18 ft. and the average length of a compact SUV is about 14.3 ft. I rarely have 3.7 feet of space around my car. And what about all the smaller cars and motorcycles? I see more and more Mini-Coopers around town.
Permits, resulting in one side of each street reserved, will reduce the number of spots available for anyone without a permit.
Although OGCMA owns the land, they do not own the streets. If they did, we probably would have seen meters in OG decades ago.
I’m sure this spiritual organization will want some cut of the money from meters.
Does anyone believe OGCMA wants permits for homeowners and meters on Ocean Ave and Main Ave? Any money from tickets for violations will go to Neptune Township, not the OGCMA. Moreover, there will be even fewer spots available for visitors who come to the OGCMA beach, boardwalk, Auditorium, Youth Temple, etc.
Editor’s note: The CMA’s priority is to be sure that parking is available for those who drive to town for their many summer events. So they might oppose reserved residential parking. But their consent would not be needed for that idea. Reserved residential parking would reduce the number of spaces only to the extent that those reserved spaces are left empty while somebody is out of town or buying $7.00 dinners at Wegmans.
However, regarding meters, the CMA owns the land at the curb where meter machines would be installed, so they would have to approve them. If there were meters, who would get the revenue from the meters? A financial deal would have to be struck between the CMA and the town.
But how would meters reduce the number of available spaces? It would reduce the number of free spaces, but not the number of available spaces. It might increase the number of spaces since the AP parkers might stay in AP. Note that residents along Ocean Avenue and Broadway are opposed to meters, but exactly why? —–PG
Curmudgeon. It is irrelevant that the HOA members are volunteers. They have placed themselves in the line of fire, and if they had done well, they would have received deserved accolades. But mere wheel spinning without results deserves criticism.
The homeowners in the Grove need better representation–something more than amateurs. How about filling up the coffers of the HOA legal fund and then bringing suits to stifle the “exploitation.” That helped in 1986 against the South End exploitation plan. It’s the only way to stop the nonsense.
The Township Committee had the proposal for 2 months. It was worthy of discussion and review, not the disrespect it received. An “expert” was not required to establish the credibility of the recommendations as a starting point. They did not even bother to notify the HOA that a further action would be tabled without discussion. That is the most significant statement of this sorry event.
The Committee refuses to address parking here because any recognition of the problem would raise the issue as an obstacle for further development in the Grove. And they don’t want that. Township governance here in Ocean Grove consists mostly of exploitation and we don’t have enough votes to make a difference to the Committee. Their primary interest is further development here.
Your criticism of the HOA are way off base here – any criticism should be directed at the Township, not volunteers that did their best under difficult circumstances.
Old Time Lady. What in the world are you saying? Please translate. What does government efficiency and straightforwardness have to do with population density?
Meanwhile, here are some facts (based on 2010 census:)
1. Ocean Grove pop. 3,342. Land area is .372 sq. mi. Density is 8,984 per square mile.
2. Asbury Park pop. 16116. Land area is 1.424 sq. mi. Density is 11,317 per square mile.
3. Avon-by-the-Sea pop. 1,901 . Land area is .426 sq. mi. Density is 4,462 per square mile.
4. Belmar pop. 5,794. Land area is 1.045 sq. mi. Density is 5,544 pe square mile.
5. Bradley Beach pop. 4,298. Land area is .612. Density is 7,022 per square mile.
Brigid. The reason that the OGHOA Parking Committee recommendations might be open to rejection is that the composition of the committee contains no experts such as parking engineers or planners. Without that sort of factual infrastructure, a court might find their report to fail the standard of “arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable.”
I believe Mayor Kevin McMillen when he said, “We are not going to run away from the problem.”
Brigid Siegel – You ask: “What makes Bradley, Asbury Park, Avon and Belmar any different than OG/Neptune?”
Did it occur to you that OG is only 1 square mile, with thousands of residents?
Paul Weinstein sent us a link to the Star Ledger, but we do not post links as comments from other publications. Sometimes we will include a quote from another source such as the Coaster. So here is a quote from that SL piece regarding the parking meeting where a decision was made to create yet another committee:
“That’s not good enough, said Klein.” (Joyce Klein is the Parking Committee chair.)
“We expect to actually make some progress to alleviate the problem this summer — not to be told a committee would be formed to study it so maybe that in 2020 we could have some action,” Klein said.
“McMillan (the Mayor of Neptune) said there’s no easy solution to the parking issue, and the best way to address it is to let the political process play out.
“We’re not going to run away from the problem,” he said.”
Editor’s note: Ms. Klein knows where we are, but she is unwilling to share her opinions with the readers of Blogfinger. Yesterday we had over 1,100 hits, with this topic being the main source of interest, and that is without any email alerts to our readers’ mailing list. —Paul @Blogfinger
I agree with Momentum on this issue. The entire operations in this town needs a complete overhaul with parking being a top priority.
There are many smart, educated people living here with sound solutions. If all of our solutions need to be presented by an approved committee, this should be clear in the procedures of the Neptune Government and should be formed. If parking solutions need an engineer, then get one.
What makes Bradley, Asbury Park, Avon and Belmar any different than OG/Neptune? They obviously have governments which actually work for the tax payers.
Why is all of this so difficult? Figure it out people and get to work!
B. Siegel
Momentum: Why is it that someone like you, with a positive message, would not have the courage to sign your comment with your real name? Your idea would have more impact if you did. —-P Goldfinger, editor @ Blogfinger.
The HOA should keep pressing the issue, in a coordinated effort, with many people speaking for their allotted 5 minutes at a time, during every regular Township Committee meeting from this point forward. The Township Committee will eventually start to pay attention.
But the HOA needs to remain serious and really refine their argument(s), focusing on a just one or two changes at a time (maybe permits, and ocean-front meters). If an engineer/planner is ultimately required, the Township should be paying for that (it’s a Township problem, after all), not the Home Owners.
Whether you are a fan of the HOA or not, they are working to address a very real problem that affects all of us in OG and they have done a lot of useful research and work at this point. We should all support a group effort to finally effect some real change on this matter.
There are 5 members on the Neptune Township Committee. Brantley was absent. Public comments began around 715 and ended before 730 and the meeting ended because bishop and rizzo left (can you leave your job during normal work hours?) despite the fact that MANY people had their hands up to comment.
As far as bishop’s comments, anyone in OG with any sense knows that he has done nothing for years and presents problems (parking in OG is impossible) rather than solutions. Democrats get (re) elected no matter what they do or do not do.