The way we were. Ocean Grove as it should look. Mt. Hermon Way at Firemen’s Park. Paul Goldfinger photo. 2004. 2015 Re-post
“Can it be that it was all so simple then
Or has time rewritten every line
And if we had the chance to do it all again
tell me, would we? could we?”
2015:
In the process of selling the North End Redevelopment Plan to the citizens of Ocean Grove in 2008, the Township Committee asserted that people in town were in favor of the plan. This pitch was based on what the OG Homegroaners had to say and what supposedly was said by citizens at “visioning sessions.”
The process of approving an “Area in Need of Redevelopment” was supposed to include the support of the citizens, but do you think the citizens wanted to get rid of the North End single family home zoning in exchange for the NERP Asbury Park South plan?
Did the Township really obtain the blessings of the citizens of our town or were they twisting the truth? We suspect the latter.
Here is a quote from the official “2008 North End Redevelopment Plan:”
“Given the importance of this site to Ocean Grove and its residents, this plan was developed in conjunction with an extensive community visioning process in which members of the public had an opportunity to comment on all aspects of the plan and its proposed design standards and requirements. Accordingly, the final plan and its core design elements reflect the input of the Ocean Grove community in creating a new vision for the North End.”
Blogfinger has pointed out many of the illegalities and improprieties that are intrinsic to the NERP. We haven’t yet exhausted everything that we have to say on this subject. Soon we will be posting our latest article entitled: “Ten reasons why there is a black cloud over the NERP,” and actually there are more than ten.
This opinion poll will offer an idea as to whether the Ocean Grove public in 2015 really wants the NERP, complete with condominiums, a hotel, retail stores, one or two new roads, and a banquet hall, or would they prefer the original zoning for 25 single family homes. Hopefully we will get 200 or more respondents, but whatever the number, I bet they are more than showed up for those “visioning sessions.”
–Paul Goldfinger, Editor @ Blogfinger. Note many comments.
Zoning law is based soundly on both Federal and State laws established through court cases that demand equality in the law. The law prohibits the Township from spot Zoning for the shear reason that it will provide greater taxes for the rest of Neptune residents at the expense of OG residents.
The Township created the first two block “hotel overlay zone” and the “North End Area in need of Redevelopment ” in direct violation of law.
There can be no question that all the attorneys involved weren’t fully aware that the public was being deceived and lied too by all the experts involved when creating these two zones.
The MLUL is very clear. All lots in OG by law can only be zoned single family, that includes the first two blocks which includes the North End. The 14th amendment demands it and therefore the MLUL also demands it.
For the planner to submit her Reexamination of the Master Plan, for the Township to approve it, and for the Township attorney who knows it violates law, to permit it, would represent massive corruption. There can be no other rational to these zoning atrocities.
Kevin Chambers
The point is that when the North End Plan was devised, the Township allowed existing zoning, single family residential, to be dumped in favor of zoning for commercial interests.
We believe that was illegal because there was no legal and sensible reason to declare that zone as a “re-development area.” It was a violation of Land Use Law.
The area had been set aside for single family houses for clergy.
Also we have photographs of a large residential tent area at the north end, representing the earliest and most historic precedent at that area.
I will leave such decisions on development to actual residents of OG of which I am not one.
The North End was always a commercial and never used for housing except for a tent area on the west that was removed for the Weslake Cafeteria in 1932. Various swimming provisions were offered and eventually the North End Hotel was built with a pavilion on the beach side of the boardwalk. Various tourist-centered businesses operated out of these buildings.
All of these are now gone. The redevelopment is obviously intended to generate revenue. Commercial development would likely bring in more money than houses. The beach site of the burned pavilion is now for sale (not lease) for $8.25 million.
There is a question of whether people would consider the location near the derelict Casino as desirable for houses given the din that arises in AP. The retaining wall and dam at Wesley Lake have problems.
I noted that in the course of my historical research that OG has lost 1,600 rooms in major hotels in the past 100 years. There were also cottages that rented rooms that did not always attract attention in the press and were thus difficult to trace. In my personal experience, finding a room in OG is often difficult in season. Many of the present hotels lack modern expectations such as elevators, non-creaky stairs and floors, sound resistant walls, and sometimes private baths.
Waerseller: Not so; all appeals are taken “on the Record” of the meeting(s).
We can’t just roll over and play dead.
Jack, it still won’t have any value.
Doug: petitions are a good way to alert people to a cause, but have no other value.. If you want your view considered you must present that view, in person, at a public meeting after stating your name and address for the record.
Doug: BF has never tried that, so I don’t know how. I also am not familiar with the process and how it could be better than our poll. If it could attract more participants (we are already well over 200), then I am all for it. Any citizen reporter out there want to take charge of this project?
If someone does, then I will pass it on to the Dept. of Consumer Affairs; I will do that with our poll when it quiets down. Meanwhile, I did send out an email blast last night to nearly 400 BF readers, encouraging them to take the poll. —Paul
Are on line petitions a viable way to present OG views to the township leaders?? If so, how would we set one up?
Thanks for the plug New Kid in Town. —Paul
I would encourage all who are participating in this poll to share it with other residents who may not read Blogfinger on a regular basis.
I was there: Thank you for your eye-witness account of the truth. We cannot allow the redevelopers to perpetuate a lie in our name.
—Paul @Blogfinger
I was present at the public “visioning meeting.” The comments from the public were overwhelmingly negative toward the plan. Public input mostly took the form of “that’s far too much new density for such a remote location.” It was a perfunctory meeting at best, held only so that the developers and township could later say the public provided “extensive input.”
OhGee: You are correct that this poll result is predictable, but it gives us all something tangible regarding attitudes in the Grove about the NERP. The Township has “set in stone” the idea that Ocean Grove’s citizens support this project, and they made it part of the official NERP document which is used to submit to others including the agencies that have jurisdiction over public policies, especially the DEP who has oversight at the North End and the Dept. of Consumer Affairs in Trenton which is currently looking at a special designation for Ocean Grove which would make high density projects easier to approve.
If the re-developers try to change the plan by asking for Township approval, then the Twp. should conduct public hearings, but meanwhile this poll will be the only actual data, such as it is, regarding whether or not Grovers are supportive of the NERP>
Paul
By reasonably wealthy, I mean in property values in comparison to Neptune, I think the census refers to the year around people, the vacation home owners are probably not taken into account; My year around neighbors are retired, carpenters, musicians and such, my summer neighbors are business owners, doctors, wall street brokers and accountants.
The poll is rather silly. No offense. Who wouldn’t take 25 single houses instead of 165 condos? The small amount of respondents that polled “No”? Gannons and other principals of WAVE who cowardly refuse to identify themselves. And probably some of the OGCMA leadership, as they stand to make more bucks with condos vs. houses.
Doug If you check the 2010 census data, there is no evidence that we are a wealthy town.
I’m pretty new in town, but I can’t imagine why residents would ever have supported a “new vision” for the North End. Since Ocean Grove is an historic district, residents and visitors alike obviously are drawn to the “old vision.” The proposed “new vision” sounds exactly like what people come here to escape.
I’m pretty new in town, but I can’t imagine why residents would ever have supported a “new vision” for the North End. Ocean Grove is an historic district and residents and visitors alike obviously come here because we like the “old vision.” The proposed “new vision” sounds exactly like what people come to Ocean Grove to escape — ugly modern overdevelopment.
I don’t think the entire area needs to be a park, but any relief from over development would be welcome. More dogs, more people, more cars, less space. The short term gain to the CMA, and Neptune for that matter, may be offset by diminishing property value.
Why do the residents who seem to agree that this development stinks not start to organize a vocal, persistent resistance. The squeeky wheel gets the oil.
I would love to be our own municipality, But the state has been trying for 20 years to merge towns, I doubt if they would let us, especially reasonably wealthy OG leaving lower income Neptune.
David: It would be wonderful to have some open space at the North End—a big park would be amazing, but the reason it is not possible is that Block 1, the bulk of the North End land, is privately owned, and those owners (the CMA—unless they already sold it or had a philanthropic epiphany) are entitled to develop it according to the law. Had they just gone ahead back in 2008, skipped the end-run on zoning, and just built houses, they would have made some money (as Jack Green did with his south end development of single family houses) and we would have currently had a beautiful part of town to enjoy and feel proud about.—-Paul Goldfinger, Editor @Blogfinger.
Negotiating is a discussion of something that is possible.
Developing the entire North End as a park is a wonderful, idea but it’s not possible.
WAVE’S plan ( now the NERP) for underground parking and taking State land for a municipal street (the boardwalk) is also not possible.
The Township Master Plan for single family houses on block (1) is possible, and establishing our own Municipality is also possible.
165 additional units in Ocean Grove? Someone must be crazy ($$$) to allow this. The impact of these additional units – crowding, parking, etc. will be intolerable and will seriously threaten the quality of life in Ocean Grove, diminishing property values, and I believe you will see an exodus with homeowners moving out.
If I may, actually without further talk and discussion with residents, I would say neither. How about some nicely done open space, using some public funding for such usage. It might show some interest into improving the quality of life for those of us that call this home, while not adding to our problems.
Why aren’t you busybodies working to secede from Neptune and join Bradley Breach?
Neptune is systematically overcharging OG through unreasonable assessments, and their police are focused on the high crime on the other side of the tracks.
Property rights and due process are sacrosanct. Houses are owned by their purchasers, not by folks who want to tell others how to paint or how to decorate.
Focus on the real issues: the tax burden and services that are marginal at best; the parking situation;The NEED for development IN SCALE WITH OG – not imposed by Neptune.
As for being busybodies about people who own properties – if you want it, buy it. That’s your right.