By Paul Goldfinger, editor at Blogfinger.net
There have been occasions in the past when Neptune has applied for a State exception to RSIS parking regulations (for the whole town of Ocean Grove except for the North End property.) The last attempt was in 2015, and the request was rejected.
Blogfinger has been in contact with the State Site Improvement Advisory Board regarding the prior Neptune quests for a “special standard” on parking. We have been mystified by the failure of the State to enforce its regulations whenever Neptune has allowed condoization to occur without providing any off street parking.
The most recent mystery surrounds the Aurora project to turn that historic hotel into four condominiums under one roof without the regulatory 8 parking spaces on the site. The Neptune Zoning Board suggested that the developer ask the Department of Community Affairs to allow it to go with just four spaces. The DCA said that the decision would be up to the municipality. We don’t know what was decided by the Neptuners, but since they have allowed over 300 condos without parking over the years, the outcome is predictable.
We could never figure why, since Neptune does what it wants anyhow, they would even need a State special standard. We have even gone to Trenton to get answers, but the results have been problematic in the past. Here is a related link that you can read.
Why give Neptune an exception on parking? click here.
One thing is clear: the parking problems in the Grove are not going away, and they are actually getting worse. The CMA is only interested insofar as their programs are concerned. The Committee moves its lips, but nothing comes out. And the Home Groaners have been failures in their efforts.
So, I decided that maybe there was another way to look at this situation rather than painting the Neptuners as disinterested, powerless, law breakers with some sort of mysterious connections.
I had a conversation with John Lago, the Administrator of the New Jersey SIAB (Site Improvement Advisory Board) under the heading of the Department of Community Affairs. (DCA)
Mr. Lago is a totally engaged and knowledgeable official who can read chapter and verse on this topic with a great degree of sympathy and understanding for small towns like Ocean Grove, especially at the Shore, regarding parking issues. He also mentioned Long Beach Island.
He makes it clear that every town is different, and his Board has been well aware of Ocean Grove’s story for many years. Their regulations provide for flexibility in interpreting the problems in each town, and sometimes exceptions are made, as occurred in Avalon where the town changed its character becoming home to wealthy folks with mega houses and lots of cars. Long Branch is another with a special standard, and each town is different.
Here is a link to our recent review of a NY Times article about changing shore towns, especially Avalon:
NY Tmes on Avalon and BF review as relates to OG
But Ocean Grove, a “unique” town with a remarkable personality, has qualities that are beloved by those who choose to live here. So the Board wants to avoid paralyzing the town with strict regulations. They would most prefer that the citizens get involved with problem solving and that the town’s “reviewers” make decisions that are best for those who live in town so that the Grove retains its special “charm.” They watch us with great interest and they are “sympathetic” to our issues.
They are not so fussy about parking as we are. For one thing Mr. Lago suggests that our town is so special, that we should be able to tolerate 4 months a year with parking gridlock. He says that OG is one of the few shore towns, maybe the only one, where a house can sell for $500,000 or $600,000 without parking and is bought by people with only one car. or no car.
Many of our citizens take the train or the bus from the the City. That is because, he says, the people who move here are not so dependent on cars and don’t mind doing a lot of walking. He refers to us as a “pedestrian town.” (ie “pedestrian oriented.”) And that is a characteristic, he says, that is very desirable for a shore town with the Grove’s qualities.
In terms of problem solving, he says that there are “many, many factors that go into an individual parking analysis” including the size of houses, off street parking, numbers of cars, the kind of people who live in a town, and the data from parking studies. So each situation is unique.
Mr. Lago spoke to me in the past, and I know that he admires Ocean Grove as does the Chairman of the Board, and they both are very careful as they consider our problems. Anyone in New Jersey who wants some sort of special treatment vis a vis parking must go through their Board. But, in general, the Board “does not interfere.”
He says that we must accept the facts that local parking issues are run through local planning and zoning boards, and those boards are political, and that’s OK as a way for a small town like OG to deal with parking difficulties.
I was influenced by his persuasive analysis, but I did remind him that we the people don’t have a clear shot at fair treatment locally.
I told him about our indifferent governance in Neptune, the aggressiveness of developers, the compromises of land use laws, the stifling of our quality of life due to parking, our failure to get permit parking—- even though it works in other towns, the Camp Meeting Association with its all-encompassing religious mission, the impotent HOA, one party rule depriving us of true representative governance, and the growing issue of mega-events and huge tourist crowds in season.
So, we have their sympathy in Trenton, but no State action unless Neptune comes back again requesting a special standard. If so we will return, and this time with a bigger group of protesters.
But now we are able to get a different look at our situation and maybe most of our residents would agree with a hands-off approach since most have no interest in activism. Perhaps some ideas will emerge that would allow some relief such as a modified permit parking plan, more shuttle buses at peak times, residents buying smaller cars, a parking garage, a big lot at the North End, more train riders buying homes, and more businesses to suit residents rather than tourists. But the fundamental problem of more cars than spaces at times may be insurmountable.
KATHY BRIER predicting some changes:
Susan: New off-street parking is illegal in the Grove according to Neptune zoning. In addition, there is no private property in OG (meaning land) because it is all owned by the Camp Meeting Association. And there are few properties that could accommodate a “parking pad.” Better ideas can be found in this article in the last paragraph. —–PG
Wouldn’t parking pads on private property be a bit of a help? I understand the reluctance to make curb cuts, but if a homeowner has a spot where 2+ cars could park with one curb cut that loses one parking space, it would help and owners would be assured their right to park.
When Neptune last asked the DCA to grant a parking exemption, they said the reason was to promote the Grove’s historic designations. But that was not true.
Allowing more condo conversions would be the result, and that is not going to promote historical preservation or make the town’s lifestyles any better.
That application was not for the benefit of the town’s people, and the DCA saw through that phony excuse.
After the Aurora’s recent success in dodging RSIS standards, watch for more condo conversions via more old buildings calling to cynical developers, some of whom are Grovers.
It’s time to fire phony Democrats and give some others a chance. There are two seats open for the next town Committee election. If you meet a Republican candidate, ask him/her about condo conversions and parking in OG. —PG @Blogfinger.
In short words, this is why NJ is referred to as “The Soprano State.”