In December, the HPC, represented by Deb Osepchuk and others got up at a Township Committee meeting and reacted negatively to the idea that their Guidelines would be changed by the Township. She made a formal statement, part of which was presented before the Committee and part of which was sent to Blogfinger. Below is a quote from her, and below that is a link to our article about the issue and a link to our January post about duplicity on the part of the HPC.
A quote from the official HPC statement: “The objectives of Ocean Grove District Architectural Guidelines are to preserve the historic architectural integrity, craftsmanship, and heritage of the nationally Designated Historic District and encourage architectural solutions which will ‘Recapture the Spirit of Ocean Grove.’
“The document dated Oct. 2016 does not accomplish this, its stated purpose. Instead it works at destroying the historic district.”
HPC guidelines cause hysterics
So, after sounding an alarm that was disturbing to many Grovers, the HPC went to ground and vanished from public view as per this issue. Why won’t the HPC continue the conversation and tell us (or tell anybody publicly) what is going on with the concerns that they enunciated over 3 months ago?
How about some transparency since historic preservation affects all of us? If any of you know the details, please comment below.
Can the people trust the HPC after this silent treatment? After all, are they not ultimately working for the people rather than for the shadow government in Neptune?
Will we let our history go slip sliding away? Here’s Paul Simon live:
Editor’s Note. Since posting this article, we have found a statement in the Committee’s minutes of March 13:
“The Mayor then stated that as Neptune Township continues to strengthen our neighborhoods and seek investment into our community, it’s important that we maintain the integrity of the history that exists within our borders, and our neighborhood’s historic beauty- without stifling progress.
Committeewoman Rizzo and I, along with our Administrator, Engineer and Land Use Director, met with a historic preservation architect to discuss the development of a new Historic Preservation Standards document. The meeting went extremely well and the architect will provide a proposal for professional services. Our Engineer and Land Use Director met with a historic preservation attorney, recommended by the architect. That meeting went well and the attorney will provide a proposal for professional services.
“Our plan is to have both the architect and attorney collaborate with Township officials and others to develop user friendly Historic Preservation Standards that will maintain the integrity of the historic district while streamlining the application and review process.
Once the draft of the Standards is complete a public forum will be held for review of the draft document prior to formal introduction. Our timeline for this process is to have the draft document completed by September; a public forum to be held in October; introduction and adoption of the Standards in November.”
The bold face portion above is ours.
We wonder if the HPC will be part of the conversation noted above. What is really behind this effort to change the Guidelines? What is the truth? Is this really a power grab by developers and politicians who are not shy about compromising our historic district?—-PG @Blogfinger
I think you need to recognize that the chair and members of the HPC have been at this for a long time and know the players at the Township very well. They may well have a strategy for dealing with this, before they go public, in an effort to work behind the scenes for a compromise of some sort.
And the last thing they want is to cooperate with the public on a solution, lest they lose any of the authority they love so much. Just my speculation, I have no private insights into the situation at all. They want to avoid a public fight and lose, because that will weaken them even further if that happens.
It won’t work. The Township Committee is hell-bent on squeezing as much tax revenue out of Ocean Grove as possible. Nothing else matters.
Curmudgeon: Thanks for shedding some light on the true issues at stake here. I also agree with your last paragraph.
It’s too bad that there is a diffuse lack of transparency around here that often obscures the real issues which are intentionally hidden from the public. The Mayor’s statement in the minutes is like that.
That is why I was so upset with the HPC, who normally seem to be an ethical group, who have selectively enveloped themselves in a cloak of secrecy—-unwilling to step up and tell us all what’s going on and why they have gone underground regarding the Guidelines issues.
If they are afraid to speak truth to power, then they all should resign and let some more courageous historians take their place.—-Paul
The housing stock can be improved by replacing properties with limited historic significance. The HPC has classified properties, with the most significant masterpieces designated “key structures” if I understand it correctly. There are several categories; I have not looked at it lately.
There are many properties of various styles built after the Victorian period that could be replaced, which is very difficult now. The new homes would presumably be larger, more modern, more fire-resistant, and most importantly have higher appraised value for taxation purposes. I think this is what the town wants to achieve, only they are going about it the wrong way. I think even some of the lovely bungalows around town could be at risk if the town gets its way.
My basic position is that there needs to be a consensus about which properties need to be fully protected, and which would be provided more latitude, up to and including demolition. I find the idea of hiring an architect to allow the town to impose new guidelines very unappealing, even if there is a review process. We need to get involved at the beginning, not the end.
Don’t you find it galling that the Committee would attempt to gut the Guidelines in the middle of February with little to no notice, and do so by revising them using a work group of know-nothings?
Curmudgeon: I love the words: “unmitigated gall and monumental effrontery.” This may be the best 5 words in a row ever on Blogfinger. Whatever it means is irrelevant. It is a thing of beauty.
Having said that, please explain “allowing the housing stock to improve.”–Paul @Blogfinger
I am totally delighted that the Township is going to attempt a review of the Guidelines. Historic preservation is a sacred cow, and a lot could be done to preserve the significant properties while allowing the housing stock to improve.
But I am not happy about the process. The Committee tried to sneak the first proposal through in the dark of night, and the content was an affront to Ocean Grovers. It would have limited full compliance to homes on Ocean Pathway and Ocean Avenue. Do they think preservation of our District is for the areas frequented by the tourists? And enforcement of Guidelines limited to the front of the house in other areas? What kind of nonsense is this? The first proposal can only be considered an act of unmitigated gall and monumental effrontery.
The fact that they are hiring a shill to generate a document doesn’t impress me at all. Their motive is to allow renovation and replacement of properties to increase ratables, and they don’t give a damn what the results are if they achieve their aims. What would you do in their position, with all of the development next door in Asbury Park?
Instead, I propose a committee representing the main constituencies here in Ocean Grove and Neptune to rework the Guidelines from the beginning. We would get a better result with community support, and avoid an adversarial review later. Why not?