Is there something suspicious going on at the North End? Who is looking at this on behalf of we the people? (This is a scene from “Twin Peaks.”)
By Paul Goldfinger, Editor@Blogfinger.net This article is re-posted now from March 22, 2020–exactly one year ago:
A copy of a letter was sent to BF by a Grover who lives at the North End. It was written by a consultant and dated March 19, 2020. It is addressed to the NJ Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Land Use Regulation in Trenton.
It is from The Lomax Consulting Group of Cape May which represents Neptune Township. Click on it for easier reading. Below the letter is the Materials Plan.
CAFRA*: Coastal Area Facility Review Act. This act is about protecting our ocean shoreline.
When I read this letter, the first thing I noticed was that the Atlantic Ocean was not mentioned or shown on the site plan. Do you suppose that was intentional? After all, if one is considering the North End Plan’s environmental impact, very close to the beach, wouldn’t the main concern be about the Ocean? Maybe they hope that some paper shuffler in Trenton might miss that important point.
They also refer to the boutique hotel as being a replacement of a demolished “historic hotel.” But would that be accurate from a historic perspective? Where is the HSOG on this? And, is the hotel shown built on a street?
I also don’t see any mention of the underground garage. Would that not be an important environmental concern given that this project has boundaries on a natural lake and on an ocean? Have they given up the plan for an underground garage? If not, why isn’t it shown in the enclosed site plan?
And a five story hotel? And two “3-4 story multi-family buildings…” Does zoning allow for these heights? Won’t that ruin the views for the neighborhood?
Also the letter doesn’t mention “condominiums,” and the misleading language suggests that the “2 multi-family buildings” contain only 39 units. And are they detached or not? Who are they kidding?
The letter says that its description is “brief” and that there is a “complete permit application package.” But the public should be able to have at least one hearing to consider a presentation as well as a Q and A.
You may recall that OGNED came to the OGHOA meeting to discuss the plan, but OGNED refused to answer many questions, and the Groaners permitted that censorship.
It’s too bad that the HOA doesn’t have a consulting lawyer to look at these things on behalf of the citizens of the Grove and to demand public hearings.
Maybe the underutilized Parking Alliance should change its focus and take a hard look, on behalf of we the people, at this project which is on the verge of becoming a reality. It’s a lot more important and suspicious than the hocus pocus parking mess.
And maybe the Township and developers are manipulating this CAFRA application through while everyone is distracted by COVID-19.
This application should be put on hold until such time as everyone’s attention is available, and the Mayor has the power to put this thing on hold.
The Township could be petitioned to press the “pause” button.
Editor’s note on 3/26/21:
Isn’t it interesting that the application to the DEP (above) seems to be from Neptune Township (as it should,) but the eventual response from the DEP is addressed to the OGNED re-developers.
This smells like Neptune has turned over ownership of the process to Gannon/Brudner (OGNED) when they should legally still be in charge of this “Zone in Need of Redevelopment” They can’t slyly slip away as if they are saying, “Who me?”
That’s the same game that the CMA played when they dropped out as re-developers.
As Jack says, the Township is still liable if trouble develops. PG
JOHN DENVER. “Farewell Andromeda. (Welcome to My Morning)”
“Welcome to my morning
Welcome to my day
I’m the one responsible
I made it just this way.”
In reading this letter again, it doesn’t name the applicant. In retrospect, the applicant is the developer OGNED. PG 5/20
Look on the letter or ask the Town Clerk.
Could you provide the information and address for any of the public that would like to request a public hearing?
Jack Bredin reviewed the letter and tells us that a public hearing would be held only if someone or some group requests it, and the request has to be filed within 15 days of this CAFRA letter. Or a 30 day public comment period could be requested.
Any person or group can request such scrutiny by sending a letter to the DEP and stating the issues of concern.
Jack says that the Neptune Committee should have requested that, but it appears that they did not.
If no one from the Grove requests a hearing, there will be none, and then this CAFRA application will likely be granted because it would appear that Grovers don’t care.
Ideally,a hearing should be arranged by the Mayor, or the HOA, or maybe the BPA could under the banner of the AAA—the Anti Apathy Alliance. But a single citizen could also apply.
Jack also finds that this letter is flawed in a number of areas including but not limited to issues having to do with blocking views in the neighborhood, underground garage may not be happening, single family residences are not detached, what about the deep pilings which will be needed, the “podium deck” defined,a second exit onto Bridge Ave, protection of Wesley Lake,and other matters which could be explored at a public hearing. Such matters would have to be listed.