Ocean Grove: The goal is to defend its history, unique character, and its current life-styles. Paul Goldfinger photograph ©
By Paul Goldfinger, Editor @Blogfinger
Both letters are relevant to Kevin Chambers guest editorial above.
They are from the State of New Jersey, Department of Community Affairs, Division of Codes and Standards, SIAB (Site Improvement Advisory Board.)
SIAB is the same body which was going to hear the Neptune Township’s request for a special parking standard in 2016, but the Neptuners backed out when a number of Grovers showed up in Trenton for the hearing.
Looking back to 2005, that letter, addressed to the Township Planning Board is signed by Mary Ellen Handelman of the New Jersey SIAB.
Neptune Township was then seeking permission (i.e. a “special area standard”) to require “only on-street parking as a policy for all future residential development in Ocean Grove .”
But the SIAB’s letter said, “The Township’s own ordinance standards for parking conflict with the RSIS.”
It pointed out that when the RSIS was signed into law, “it stipulated that technical standards for parking as established in the RSIS would supersede any and all such municipal rules.”
It also said, “Since June 3, 1997 when RSIS became effective, Neptune Township’s ordinance for these standards became invalid. The RSIS are uniform statewide infrastructure standards that apply to all site improvements for residential development.”
On September 29, 2009, the state of New Jersey Department of Community Affairs SIAB wrote a letter to a consultant representing Neptune Township regarding the town’s 2009 application for a special area parking standard which would prohibit off-street parking in new residential development in Ocean Grove.
In the letter, it informed Neptune that their application was denied. It said, “In the absence of an approved special area standard, Neptune township must comply with the parking standards in the RSIS. Any local ordinances on parking are “deemed to have been repealed and of no further force or effect, as specified at N.J.A.C. 5:21-1.10 (b)
GRASCALS “Boy, Giraffes are Selfish.”
Paul
Thank you for your well-written explanation of what RSIS wrote to the Township after my posting. Anyone, including the two attorneys for the OGHOA will know that what they have been doing and saying all along has been not only wrong but in violation of the law.
The Planner, knowing Neptune’s zoning has been invalid for OG, still wrote official reports that were false. The Attorneys for both the Planning and Board of Adjustment have been making rulings knowing that all of the Township testimony was false. The residents of OG have never had a fair hearing at any of the Township Boards.
I have never had a fair hearing in court because everything was based on fraud and perjury.
The other case that was important was the lease case that the OGCMA won. That established that all lots in OG are held in perpetuity by the OGCMA and cannot be merged by the Zoning Official or the Board of Adjustment.
There was further fraud and perjury at the Board of Adjustment and for my court hearing where it was presented that the Main Ave. development was one lot when it was in fact two lots.
We’ll see what the Township will do now. I think that they have come to the end of their devious rope.
The OGHOA lawyers who are on that Board, Joyce and Barbara, are fully aware that the zoning requires parking and that the Township has failed to create or use a legal lot size definition for OG’s zoning. For what reason I don’t know, but again , all attorneys are officers of the court and must defend the laws of the State and court rulings.
These two OGHOA attorneys and the three attorneys for Neptune have all been ignoring the law and refusing to uphold court rulings. This is why we have such a mess in this community. None of these condos should ever have been permitted. Each was granted through a violation of the law.
Again, thank you for what you are doing for the community. The actions of Neptune are appalling.
Kevin