Mary’s Place did not have to provide parking. The BPA did not mention zoning and RSIS issues, so they need to consider the condoization of the Grove, the North End, and other related topics.
By Paul Goldfinger, Editor @Blogfinger
I don’t know of any prior poll in the Grove that had this many participants. Blogfinger surveys have rarely reached 300. Of course, the methodology of the BPA survey leaves open the possibility of some fraud, but probably not much. Many years ago there was a referendum asking if OG could leave Neptune and form its own town, and that probably got a bigger turnout, but the Grovers lost that battle. We placed the link to the BPA survey in yesterdays post (scroll down to that post) and we generalized the conclusions. Congratulations to BPA on completing a survey with such a high percent of citizens participating.
We know that the survey produced some interesting data, but as far as doing anything about our parking distress, the ball was not yet moved up the field—this is a first step.
But that survey report does contain some interesting information which is not exactly data, but is opinion, and we should look closely at that. After years of smoke screens emanating from developers, Chamber, HOA, and Neptuners that sit high above us in their meeting room, let’s hope the BPA stays transparent and keeps us well informed about their activities.
The quotes below are from the BPA documents so far:
a. Mr. Andrew Levine, President of the BPA, hopes to obtain a “pilot program implemented in time for next summer.” But who will design such a program, and will the self-interested players in town go for it, including the CMA which threatened to sue the town over merely mentioning permit parking and the Committee which has been dancing around this subject for years?
b. “There has been a rise in incivility which can negatively affect resident and visitor perceptions of OG as a place where all are welcome.”
Where is the data to support this statement, and how important is this factor?
c. BPA mentions the “removal of ‘warehoused’ vehicles after 30 days. ” But they evidently did not discuss this with the Neptune PD Traffic Department (we have) because that new ordinance is impossible to enforce, so forget about it.
d. “Periodic conversations with, and actions of, CMA leadership on the issue.” Really? What are these conversations about? As it is, the CMA rarely shares what’s on its mind, and that makes it hard to understand them, so let’s hear about those “conversations.”
e. “Addition of 18 new parking spaces on Central Avenue. ” But they might have also mentioned that those are diagonal spaces, as are the new ones on Main Avenue. If the BPA plans to suggest more unsafe diagonal spaces, they might consider letting the public know.
The BPA needs to change the subject, getting away from more spaces and getting into the supply side: numbers of tourists, numbers of cars, and numbers of big events. They should exercise their “independence” by demanding that our residential community get top priority on parking.
f. “Ocean Grove is significantly denser in housing units than surrounding towns. Ocean Grove is only .372 square miles of land.” This, they say, “creates an especially volatile situation.” What is meant by “volatile” ?
This topic of density goes to the obvious idea that we need a larger number of reserved spaces for residents per square mile, compared to other towns. What is wrong with asserting that the residents should get top priority in dealing with the ugly parking wars in town? The Mayor of Belmar said that for his town.
g. 58% of responders identified as year-round residents spending more than 6 months in town. That seems surprising and further identifies this town as being a small residential community which should be treated as such, as opposed to a venue for interminable tourist events.
h. “77% said that parking is a seasonal problem (summer only”) This stat raises the question of the sanity of those who participated in this survey. Our parking problems occur from May through October. We don’t need frequent parking problems to say that a month should be included in the count.
Today, Saturday October 26, there was a Halloween festival in Firemens Park, and that whole part of town was clogged with cars. And, Asbury Park Saturdays always stress parking here at least during the 6 months mentioned. It only takes one crowded Saturday in a month to critically upset the life styles of residents. OK, November through April could be excluded as problem months.
Parking glut around Firemens Park Saturday 10/26/19 Blogfinger photo.
Crowded Halloween event on 10/26/19 Blogfinger photo. It doesn’t feel like the “off-season.”
i. “69% of respondents believe residents should receive resident parking permits.” OK, sanity prevails.
j. 98% of respondents gave their names. I wish more would do the same when commenting on BF, but we will continue to accept anonymous inputs.
So, the BPA has done a great service by giving us information worth discussing in the future. They have revealed how complicated this problem is, and good luck to them in pursuing answers. It is reassuring that quite a few Grovers offered to lend a hand in the process.
DAVID TOMLINSON From Mary Poppins:
What the report shows, is that the planner hired by the Township is incompetent. The zoning for OG requires by law that all leased lots must be zoned for single family use since they fail to meet the minimum requirements required by the MLUL.
The fact that the planner and the Township boards and its attorneys continue violating law by using fraudulent zoning prohibits the community from solving its parking and density problems.
Until the planner is fired and legal zoning is established for OG. The township and it’s ruthless attorneys will continue to rape Ocean Grove.
You are right. It is no longer a 10 summer weekend problem. You are also right major community components are not solving the parking issue.
Don’t they realize solutions will benefit them?
With any major challenge, it starts with simple accommodating improvements. Eventually collaborating leads to greater solutions. So, let’s look at simple initial arrangements.
Start with those 10 intense summer weekends. There are a multitude of empty public school parking lots. Two bargaining chips for acquisition: Ocean Grove taxpayers–most without school-age children –make a major financial contribution to our schools. A separate liability insurance policy would be needed with premium paid by community groups using the lots.
The basic innovator–our landlord– has the power to move this idea and receive the most benefits. The Camp Meeting executes annual contracts with tenters that can designate parking in school lots. Of course, they will have drop -off points for furnishings, frequent grocery and other deliveries, as well as family and guest arrivals. The driver returns to the school lot and is shuttled back to the tent (probably in a used inexpensive golf cart.). Of course, issues of retrieving the car, lot security, and round the clock availability can be resolved as it has in other shore communities
Do you think the same arrangement with drop off points for family and equipment can be handled with day-trippers to the beach? The Camp Meeting may even want to charge a combined parking and driver-shuttle fee.
The other community component issuing a “contract” (better to say a “reservation”) are the hotels and bed and breakfasts. The same routine: drop off, school lot, shuttle etc. Who would require them to do it? The chamber voluntarily or the Township though licensing and certification.
Such a start has deficits: the driver’s time back and forth–and the cost of shuttle and security service. It will take more than a bake sale. Perhaps, those who will benefit the most can consider it overhead.