Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Charles Layton’ Category

Burned upstairs bedroom

By Charles Layton

Photos by Paul Goldfinger

For all the months we’ve been writing about the abandoned house at 91 Cookman Avenue, and for all the years neighbors have complained about it, we’d never gotten an inside look at the place.

Until now.

On Wednesday, the new owner, Jack R. Green III, and his son and associate in the building business, Jack Green IV, gave us a tour. Workmen had hauled out most of the debris – about two dumpster loads — so what we saw was a good deal neater than the place’s actual condition during the past decade.

Even so, what a dump!

At some point during the period of its deterioration a fire broke out on the second floor, and the damage is still apparent – blackened walls, doorways and ceilings.

Two Jacks on the porch at 91 Cookman Avenue

The house had been owned by a New York City woman who inherited it from her parents but lacked the means to maintain it. Jack Green IV purchased it on June 30 with the intention of renovating.

One of his architects, Carolyn Young, was there on Wednesday taking measurements with a tape. She and another architect, Cate Comerford, will prepare plans in the coming days. Green said his team will submit the plans to Neptune’s zoning department and then to the Historic Preservation Commission. If all of that goes well, he said he’d like to begin work by mid-December.

His hope is to have the place restored and ready to put on the market by summer. Green has considerable experience restoring old houses in Ocean Grove, and he does not seem intimidated by this one. “This is an easy one,” he told us.

According to the previous owner, the house dates back at least to 1891. It is considered a “key structure” in the Historic District of Ocean Grove, meaning it is listed in Neptune’s Master Plan as having special historical and architectural importance.

Green paid $182,000 for the property. He said it probably will cost him at least $300,000 to renovate, not including taxes and overhead. When it’s done, he will probably put it on the market for about $620,000, he said.

This house is one of a handful of deteriorated properties that have caused concern in Ocean Grove in recent years. Its renovation will constitute a rare victory in the struggle to save these crumbling old architectural gems.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Read Full Post »

By Charles Layton

Ocean Grove has 45.1 same-sex couples per 1,000 households — the highest ratio in New Jersey — according to a report on mycentraljersey.com, a Gannett Company website.

In a photo finish, Lambertville came in second with 45.0 same-sex couples per 1,000 households. Asbury Park was third with a ratio of nearly 43 per 1,000.

Those numbers put all three places ahead of such well-known gay meccas as San Francisco.

The numbers are from a study conducted at the University of California at Los Angeles, based on U.S. Census data.

Oddly, the Gannett story leads with Lambertville having the second-greatest concentration of same-sex couples. Only in the 10th paragraph does it mention that Ocean Grove came in first.

This arrangement of the facts prompted one of our citizens to complain on Ocean Grove United’s Facebook page. He wrote that he found it “a little annoying” that the story led with Lambertville’s second place. “Why not lead with #1 — OG???”

To read the Gannett story, go here.

Read Full Post »

By Charles Layton

It looks as though, over the next couple of years, Asbury Park will resume construction of new beachfront townhouses and condominiums. But it will proceed more slowly and carefully this time to avoid the calamities that resulted from its fast-track development plans of the past.

There is a lesson here for Ocean Grove, as negotiations proceed over our own North End hotel/residential redevelopment plan.

Asbury Park had soaring ambitions in 2002 when it set out to revive its beachfront area. It drew up a $1.25 billion redevelopment plan that was to include 3,100 new residential units, mostly condos. But then, in the midst of construction, the housing market crashed. The Esperanza, a high-rise project that was to contain 224 luxury units next to the beachfront, was abandoned by its developer and foreclosed upon by its lender due to lack of sales. Wesley Grove, another condo project just across from Ocean Grove, also fell flat in the market. The developer only completed one of four planned phases, leaving a forest of unsightly wooden stumps in an open field where the rest of the homes would have been.

Last December, the City of Asbury Park took its master developer to court, accusing the developer of defaulting on its obligations. And three weeks ago an arbitrator ruled that the developer was not responsible for most of the delays and failures the city had cited. Instead, he declared, the primary failure was the city’s own fast-track plan, which was at odds with housing market reality.

“The market conditions in the United States, including New Jersey, during this time period were, and continue to be, extremely poor,” the arbitrator, retired federal judge Nicholas Politan, wrote. “Testimony elicited at the hearing supports the fact that there exists a housing market catastrophe. This is particularly true in areas primarily geared to seasonal and second home development.”

(Every realtor in Ocean Grove would probably say “amen” to that.)

And so, rather than allow the city to acquire a new master developer and plunge headlong, as before, Politan prescribed a more modest and prudent course. He ordered the developer to deliver plans this month for a new project – 28 townhouses at Asbury Avenue and Kingsley Street – and to complete those homes within about a year and a half. Once 50 percent of those units are sold, the developer could begin building 168 more units at Munroe and Cookman. Until 50 percent of those are sold, other proposed housing projects in the oceanfront redevelopment area would remain on hold.

How does all this affect Ocean Grove’s North End? Well, in the first place, besides a hotel, the North End plan includes as many as 85 residences, most of them condominiums. In the second place, as Politan says, the catastrophically bad housing market continues. And in the third place, the additional residences likely to come on line in Asbury, right across Wesley Lake from the North End, will be added competition for the North End condos — and in an already glutted market.

Last month, the Ocean Grove Home Owners Association approved a list of  suggestions for Neptune Township to consider as it negotiates a final agreement with the North End developers. One of its suggestions is a timetable somewhat like the one Politan is imposing on the Asbury Park developers. The HOA suggests that each block of condos should be 75 percent sold before the next block is started, “to insure no empty partially constructed structures.”

The wisdom of this suggestion is obvious.

A victim of the housing market, The Esperanza in Asbury was never finished. Photo by Mary Walton

Read Full Post »

By Charles Layton

This evening (Wednesday, August 3), Neptune’s Zoning Board of Adjustment will hear further testimony on a builder’s proposal to encroach on Ocean Grove’s famous “flared setback” along Ocean Pathway. So far, the board has only heard one side of this argument – the builder’s side. Given the issue’s importance, the board should hear fuller evidence and alternative points of view.

The flared setback was designed by Ocean Grove’s founders. Under their plan, each house along Ocean Pathway and other east-to-west streets was set back in lines that widen toward the ocean from Central Avenue to Ocean Avenue. The purpose was to provide ocean views and sea breezes for homes up to two blocks inland along these avenues. It is a good neighbor policy, preventing one home owner from depriving others of some of the benefits of seaside living. On a Google satellite photo (for which, click here and type in “ocean grove”) one can see the pattern clearly along Main, Heck, Embury and other avenues, but especially along Ocean Pathway.

“Ocean Grove appears to be the earliest user of this device. Taken within the context of urban planning, Ocean Grove is significant not only on a national scale, but on a world scale as well.” Those words are from Ocean Grove’s nomination form submitted to the Department of the Interior when the town was seeking to become a National Historic District. The flared setback was one of the primary justifications for our national historic status.

The Historic Preservation Commission’s guidelines, as expressed in a Township ordinance, say this: “The ‘flare’ must be preserved. Where applicable, proposed improvements shall NOT infringe upon the delineated ‘Flare’ and its historic importance to the Historic District of Ocean Grove.” (The boldface and underline are part of the document, emphasizing the point.)

The setback was observed and enforced rather strictly during Ocean Grove’s so-called period of historical significance – from its founding in 1869 to about 1910. Some time after that, and into the 1970s, some people disregarded the rules and put porches, stairways and additions out into the flare. After 1975, however, when the Grove became a historic district, the flared setback began to be enforced more seriously for new buildings and additions. Indeed, many argue that failure to protect this setback could at some point endanger the town’s national historic designation.

Which brings us to the issue now before the Zoning Board. Local builder Hans Kretschman is proposing to build two houses on the lots where the Manchester Inn stood before its destruction in last year’s fire. Kretschman is seeking a variance to the setback rule on the grounds that these houses will replicate two buildings that had stood on those lots prior to 1910. He argues that the historic buildings he intends to replicate encroached into the flared setback, so his buildings should be allowed to do that also.  (Go here to read our previous article, containing a fuller account of his argument.)

The claim that those original buildings violated the setback is questionable, however. In fact, according to Sanborn Maps from the 1905-1910 period, the structures that stood on the Manchester site appear to have observed the flared setback rule. Mr. Kretschman’s attorney has not submitted those maps into evidence, nor have they been mentioned in testimony, although they are considered the most authoritative record of the building footprints of the time. (They were originally created for assessing fire insurance liability – serious business.)

Later, apparently in the 1920s, the single building that replaced and subsumed the two earlier ones – and which became the modern Manchester Inn – did have a porch that encroached into the setback. But that came after, not during, the period of  historical significance. It is therefore hard to see how one could justify having a new building encroach into the setback by arguing that doing so would respect the site’s historical integrity.

At best, the history of the Manchester property is unclear based on evidence submitted to the Zoning Board thus far. So, rather than making a decision and setting a precedent based on one side of an argument, one would hope that the board would take its time and investigate all available evidence, including the Sanborn maps. On a matter of such importance – not just to Kretschman but to the whole town – it would be foolish to rush.

-0-

NOTE: The above-referenced meeting was held on Wednesday evening. For a report on the outcome, click here.

Read Full Post »

By Charles Layton

On Saturday, members of the Ocean Grove Home Owners Association waded into the debate over whether Neptune Township should change its form of government. But as the arguments grew more heated — and also more substantive and interesting — the HOA president, Denis McCarthy, tried with limited success to close down the debate.

“This is not a debate here about alternative forms of government,” he told the members at one point. But it was clearly a discussion many audience members wanted to have, and they pressed on.

Warren Lapp, an invited guest speaker, was there to explain the merits of having a referendum this fall on the issue. But he too argued that the present question was not whether changing our government to a Mayor-Council system was a good or bad idea, but merely whether Neptune should put the issue to the voters in November.

Lapp is a member of NeptuneGovernment4All, which is gathering signatures on a petition calling for the referendum. The referendum would be required if the group gets 20 percent of Neptune’s 18,083 registered voters to sign its petition. If voters then approved it, Neptune would be bound to convert to a Mayor-Council system that would expand the number of elected officials from five to ten, including a full-time mayor. The township would also be bound to divide itself into six wards, with one Council member elected from each ward and three more elected at large. (At present, all five Township Committee members run at large.)

Denis McCarthy tells an audience member not to argue about alternative forms of government. Warren Lapp (L). Photo by David Layton.

The debate grew heated as Committeeman Randy Bishop of Ocean Grove, speaking from the audience, began questioning the implications of a ward system. Although proponents have argued that Ocean Grove would receive better representation by having its own ward, Bishop contends that Ocean Grove is only large enough to constitute two-thirds of a ward; it would therefore have to be merged with part of the Midtown neighborhood to form a ward.

Kennedy Buckley, an HOA trustee, said he thought some parts of the change-of-government proposal sounded good, but that a full-time mayor and five more members of the governing body would mean a more costly government. Lapp disputed that. “The cost of government is not in the number of people in government, it’s in the efficiency of government,” he said. However, the question of how a Mayor-Council structure might improve the workings of government was not addressed.

Members of the audience continued to return to the question of exactly how a ward system would work and whether it would help or hurt Ocean Grove. Ann Horan, the HOA’s treasurer, said “we’re not Ocean Grove anymore” if we have to share a ward with Midtown, which lies to the west of Ocean Grove, just across the train tracks.

State law requires that when a political entity is divided into wards, those wards must be contiguous and approximately equal in size. “Because we’re contiguous to Midtown,” said HOA member Norm Goldman, “that’s who we’d be lumped in with.”

“That’s misinformation,” Lapp said. He did not explain what other area might be joined with Ocean Grove to form a ward.

Lapp said the people gathering petition signatures had found widespread approval for the idea of having a full-time, directly-elected mayor.

“We have to have our signatures by next weekend,” he said. “It’s going to be a hell of a task” to meet that deadline.

The petition must be presented to county election officials by September 2 — 60 days before the elections. However, the deadline is actually much shorter, because time is required for the Neptune municipal clerk’s office to process and verify the signatures.

Lapp did not say now many signatures his group has gathered so far.

Before Lapp’s presentation, HOA trustee Barbara Burns gave an explanation of the different forms of local government New Jersey law allows. She recommended two Internet links which she said were especially informative: the New Jersey League of Municipalities and Rutgers University/Center for Government Services.

Lapp’s group also has a website: http://www.ng4a.net.

Read Full Post »

By Charles Layton

We have our own little island here in Ocean Grove. We are sequestered by gates to the west and by bodies of water on three other sides – moats, you might say. This blog strives to mirror life within these idyllic confines by savoring the architecture, history, music, street fairs, and just the feeling one gets walking the streets – so different from other parts of Neptune Township.

But I was jarred out of my isolationism at last Monday’s Township Committee meeting, when more than a dozen citizens of Neptune’s Midtown area showed up to complain about persistent incidents of gunfire. In recent weeks, people in that neighborhood have been severely wounded, and at least one was reported killed. Bullets have been fired into houses and passing cars. While we in Ocean Grove complain about bicycle thefts, these people are in fear for their lives.

“People in the neighborhood are telling me, ‘I am afraid to come out of my house’,” Diana Harris, who heads the Midtown Urban Renaissance Corporation, told the Committee.

Bonnie Baity spoke of having a bullet pass through the wall of the day care center she owns. Another resident said, “I don’t drive down Heck Avenue. There are only certain places I will drive. I have to circle around the whole neighborhood to get to my house. That’s crazy.”

Others told of the intimidating presence of idle young people who gather nightly at the corner of Heck and Atkins, some of them apparently armed. Cordelia Bullock said the neighborhood has no parks or other recreational opportunities for young people, including latchkey children. “Without positive activities you’re going to have negative activities,” she said.

These witnesses listened politely as Neptune Police Chief Robert Adams told them his department was working with officials in Asbury Park and elsewhere to find new, coordinated approaches to the problem. (Midtown shares a border with Asbury Park.) Committeeman Randy Bishop said a Neighborhood Watch program is being organized; Officer Michael Adam, who is police liaison to Ocean Grove’s NW program, will be involved in that.

Police Chief Adams has met with members of the Midtown community before, as have Mayor Kevin McMillan and others. The discussion Monday night was intense – but it was an adult discussion, free of the grandstanding one sometimes sees when Ocean Grovers complain about parking. There seemed to be general agreement that the problem was deep and complex and the solution would need to be multifaceted. “We want to work with you,” one man said to Adams. But one could hear the desperation in these people’s voices, and see the pain written on their faces. They are truly worried about the future of their neighborhood.

Midtown is a mixture of middle-class and poor residents. But unless the violence is stopped, one can imagine people of means and talent giving up on the place, moving out and leaving the neighborhood to become a festering slum, as I have seen happen in Philadelphia. That would be unacceptable.

We are talking about a neighborhood that is only five blocks from the gates of Ocean Grove. And I came away thinking that we, and the rest of Neptune, owe these people our sympathy and moral support. And if there’s a more substantial way we can be of help, we owe them that, too.

A couple of news stories on this issue can be found on the Asbury Park Press website — go here.   And here.  And today’s Coaster also has an article about it. I would urge everyone to read those.

Read Full Post »

NOTE: This updates a previous article on this subject.

By Charles Layton

Municipal Court hearings are coming up soon for the owners of 35 Embury Avenue, 78 South Main Street and 24 McClintock Street in Ocean Grove.

In March, Neptune Code Enforcement cited the owner of 35 Embury, Beatrice Albano of Brooklyn, NY, for a variety of serious maintenance violations. The unoccupied house has rotted wood throughout but especially around the windows. Huge areas lack paint, and boards have pulled loose, leaving large cracks and holes for rain to enter the building.

The Township issued a summons in May, and Albano is due in court on Thursday to enter a plea.

The house at 24 McClintock, also unoccupied, has been in violation of maintenance laws for years. Problems have included rotting wood, broken windows, broken shingles and damaged porch rails. In September of 2009 Code Enforcement issued a summons to the owner, Jason Richelson of Brooklyn, but the case became mired in bureaucratic red tape and seemed to have been forgotten until July of 2010, when the Historic Preservation Commission complained to Code Enforcement about the house.

The house at 78 South Main is, by all outward appearances, a shambles. In March of this year Code Enforcement ordered the owner, Eve Annenberg of New York City, to “make all necessary repairs” to bring the building up to code requirements. That has not been done.

Richelson and Annenberg are to appear for a hearing in Municipal Court on June 23.

Richelson, Annenberg and Albano are the latest in a string of owners called into court in recent months over long-standing maintenance problems with unoccupied buildings in Ocean Grove. Others are the owners of 80 Main Avenue, 23 Seaview Avenue (the Park View Inn), 14 Spray Avenue and 96 Lawrence Avenue.

Read Full Post »

By Charles Layton

One of the most disturbing things about the recent fuss over swan boats on Fletcher Lake was the way information about that proposal was withheld from our citizens.

One example: Sometime this spring the promoters gave a presentation to the Fletcher Lake Commission — a public body — but the fact that they did so was never made public in any way. People in Ocean Grove who care passionately about that lake, and who normally ask to be notified about the Commission’s meetings, were not notified about that particular meeting. This, they say, was suspiciously unusual. Even now I cannot find anything on the Neptune Township website about that meeting. If you click on “Agendas & Minutes” and then click on “Fletcher Lake Commission,” you get a blank page. The Bradley Beach website is equally unhelpful. We only learned what was afoot with Fletcher Lake because some Ocean Grovers got wind of it, purely by accident, and spent an inordinate amount of effort digging out the facts.

Why the official silence?

Another issue of huge concern to our town was the recent settlement between the Neptune Board of Education and the ACLU. But have you seen anything on the school district’s website explaining the terms of that settlement? I can’t find it there. Have you heard school board officials describe the terms in any detail? Blogfinger published those terms in full because no one else was doing so, questions were flying and erroneous accounts were starting to spread. But the details we published didn’t come to us from school officials; we had to get them via the ACLU.

Again, why so much official reticence?

Here’s something else Ocean Grovers urgently care about: the North End Redevelopment Plan. But there’s a general lack of understanding among our citizens as to what that plan contains. The plan’s full text is available on the Neptune Township website, but just try to find it. Here’s what you have to do: Type “redevelopment” into the search field. (Typing “north end” gets you nowhere.) Scroll down to “Economic Development” and click the phrase “Read More.” Then scroll way, way, way way down until you get to “Redevelopment Plan-OG North End.” It took me two days to figure this out; it was like searching for The Lost Chord.

On Saturday the Home Owners Association passed a resolution about the North End, and that resolution includes a request that the Township use its website to keep citizens informed and updated. Good idea, and we hope the HOA continues to press the point.

Here’s another transparency issue: demolition by neglect. We try to keep people up to date on the court proceedings against the owners of problem properties in Ocean Grove. But wouldn’t it be better if the Municipal Court kept its schedules of trials and hearings online so every citizen could keep up — not just about code enforcement cases but all cases? This is the 21st century, the information is already in the court’s computers, and it is a basic public record.

Sometimes information that rightfully belongs to the public is kept from us because someone in authority wants it so. And sometimes it’s kept from us because no one cares enough to make the effort to share it. But whether the motives are active or passive, the result is the same: people are left in the dark about the workings of their government.

We used to rely on the media to keep us informed, but our local news media are weaker and more overextended than ever before. Given the economics of the news business, this won’t change. So if people in Ocean Grove want sound information, they’ll have to start demanding it.

Read Full Post »

Fletcher Lake. Photo by Paul Goldfinger

By Charles Layton

Quietly, without publicity, a proposal is being advanced for a commercial swan boat operation on Fletcher Lake in Ocean Grove. This would be in addition to the one soon to open on the Asbury Park side of Wesley Lake.

The Fletcher Lake project, though, is more problematic because that area — between the boardwalk and Central Avenue — is not zoned for commercial use. However, the promoters may have a way around the prohibition of commercial activity there. One of the businessmen involved, Robert Hilton, formerly of Ocean Grove, told me that zoning would not be a problem because the business he and his partner are proposing would not be year-round. A floating dock would be installed in the spring and then removed in the fall, Hilton said.

Bernard Haney, Neptune Township’s land use administrator, also said zoning wouldn’t be an issue, but for a rather different reason: “The dock [would be] in the water; we have no control of the water.” If the promoters were building something beside the lake, on land, that might present a zoning issue, Haney said.

Hilton and his partner in the venture, Clark Cate of Ocean Grove, gave a presentation to the Fletcher Lake Commission about two months ago, in which they described pedal boats operating from a small floating dock next to Ocean Grove. (The Commission is composed of members from both Bradley Beach and Ocean Grove.) Hilton said he has also consulted with Neptune Township Committeeman Randy Bishop of Ocean Grove and various other officials and has received encouragement. “We wanted to make sure nobody had any issues before we started the project,” Hilton said.

However, those not consulted were the homeowners near the site of the proposed dock. Some of them do have issues, and they are complaining that they only found out about the plan two weeks ago, more or less by accident, and have had a difficult time getting further information.

Marilyn Laverty, who lives on Broadway directly across from the site, said a boating concession would harm the environment and would also “commercialize an area that should be preserved and in fact improved environmentally rather than damaged.”

Another neighbor, Carol Woidt, also worries about opening up the lakeside to business activity. “I don’t want that to be an opening for other commercial things over here like food or that kind of thing,” she said. “Also, I wonder how it’s going to be advertised, are we going to have big signs over on the lake or in that area?”

Jeannine Rudolph, who also lives nearby, said, “I’ve been involved in the annual community cleanup of Fletcher Lake for five years now. Every year, we find that people have used this protected wetland as a dumping ground — from beer cans to bicycles to tires.” She fears that a pedal boat business “will add to the pollution in this already fragile ecosystem.”

Cate said he and Hilton would not permit food on their boats and that they “would make a point of going around and doing cleanups. We want to keep the lake the way it is, it’s gorgeous.”

Cate said he expects to get the business going sometime this summer, starting perhaps with six pedal boats and expanding if needed to as many as 10. He said they were considering two-person boats or four-person boats. Hilton emphasized that “nothing is 100 percent finalized yet,” but he said that “everybody in the world is on board” including the state Department of Environmental Protection, the federal EPA and the state Division of Fish and Wildlife.

Some of those questioning the project say there is no record so far of the DEP approving a commercial enterprise on the lake. Some opponents also question the notion that the zoning issue could be avoided by having the dock float in the water rather than being attached to the land. Regarding that, Cate told me, “From what I understand, we have the approvals that we need from everybody.”

The Camp Meeting Association, which owns the land, won’t charge the operators for its use, said Rev. Scott Hoffman, the CMA’s chief administrative officer. “We’re just allowing them to do it because we think it’s a good thing for tourism.”

Hilton also argued that boats on Fletcher Lake would be good for the town’s tourist economy.

Cate and his wife, Margaret, owned the Manchester Inn on Ocean Pathway, which burned down last year. Since then, he said, “I have been trying to find some new, people-related business that I could get back into and enjoy… Right now this is not a big business for us, this is something we could actually run ourselves.”

Read Full Post »

The Great Auditorium interior during the Choir Festival. Photos by Paul Goldfinger

— UPDATED STORY: Includes interview with ACLU attorneys —

By Charles Layton

The American Civil Liberties Union is threatening legal action unless the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association removes religious symbols from the Great Auditorium prior to Neptune High School’s graduation ceremonies there.

The dispute is over the constitutional issue of separation of church and state.

Graduation is scheduled for June 17.

The Neptune Board of Education has been negotiating with ACLU attorneys and their client for some time and has made several concessions in hopes of avoiding legal action. According to Superintendent David Mooij, the board has agreed to remove all religious content from the graduation program. However, Mooij said, the two sides remain stuck over the ACLU’s claim that “religious objects” should also be covered from view. The objects at issue are the large white cross on the front of the building, the two lighted religious signs inside on either side of the stage (shown in photo above) and a religious symbol at one of the doorways.

Mooij said the Camp Meeting Association, which owns the auditorium, has offered to make some concessions but says it “can’t take down or cover those signs, and I agree with them.”

The two ALCU attorneys said they thought it would be a simple and inexpensive matter for the Camp Meeting to cover up the four signs for the night of the graduation only. “We don’t think that’s too much to ask,” said Jeffrey Pollock, a Princeton attorney who is handling the case along with his wife, Seval Yildirim, a law professor at Whittier Law School in California.

Neptune High School has been holding graduation ceremonies in the Great Auditorium for six or seven decades. Shortly after last year’s graduation the grandmother of a graduate sent a letter to the school board objecting to the ceremony’s religious content and to its location in a place of worship. She also voiced her complaint at the board’s September work session.

The board took the complaint seriously and, following lengthy discussions, decided to do away with all religious content in the graduation program, including the traditional student invocation and the playing of “Onward Christian Soldiers.”

“We thought things would be OK going forward,” Mooij said. “Some time elapsed before we heard back from this individual by way of the ACLU. The ACLU acknowledged our programmatic changes but said there were still problems with the venue.”

Pollock and Yildirim told me that if the school board and the Camp Meeting do not agree to cover up the religious symbols, they would probably recommend to their client that she file suit, either in state or federal court. The New Jersey courts might be the more likely choice. “The New Jersey constitution has more specific limitations upon the actions of a public entity like a public school,” Pollock said. However, he said, both the state and federal constitutions have a strong preference “that a public school find a place that is nonreligious, so that if you’re not of that religion you don’t feel excluded.”

Mooij said holding the graduation in the auditorium was important to the school because it “has historic significance and status” and also because of the large number of people it can accommodate. “We print 3,000 tickets every year,” he said, “so families can bring not only moms and dads and siblings but grandparents and aunts and uncles. To get 3,000 seats anywhere else, this community would have to travel a considerable distance.”

He said it was unclear how long the school has been holding its graduations there, but “our high school secretary’s father is 91, and he graduated there. And he said his was not the first class to do so.”

The grandmother who initiated the challenge has no relatives graduating from Neptune High this year, her two attorneys said, but she does have relatives scheduled to graduate next year.

-0-

For more stories on this issue, go here and here.

Read Full Post »

By Charles Layton

We continue to receive comments about the “Demolition by Neglect” ordinance and questions about whether it is working and, if not, why not.

But before addressing that, some background:

Last July, the Historic Preservation Commission asked the Township to investigate four unoccupied and run-down Ocean Grove properties — 91 Cookman Avenue, 24 McClintock Street, 80 Main Avenue and 23 Seaview Avenue — to find out whether, in effect, they were being demolished through their owners’ neglect. If they are, it’s a violation of the law.

Upon receiving such a request from the HPC, according to the Demolition by Neglect ordinance, the Department of Code Enforcement is supposed to contact the owner and arrange for an immediate inspection. Code is then supposed to report the results of that inspection back to the HPC. If the inspection confirms that demolition by neglect is taking place (the law contains a definition of this) the HPC then orders the owners to correct the defects.

Code did not follow that procedure. It did inspect the buildings, and it found major problems, but it did not really make a determination as to whether the properties were, in fact, being demolished through owner neglect. Nor did it give the HPC a report or keep it informed by other means. For many months, people at the HPC have seemed not to know what is happening. Instead, Code followed its normal procedure under the property maintenance laws: it cited the owners for violations and, when the violations were not corrected, it issued summonses and proceeded against the owners in court. Those cases are still in court; to its credit, the Township is pressing forward with most of them.

At the last Township Committee meeting, Kathy Arlt of Ocean Grove asked the Committee why the Demolition by Neglect ordinance was not followed. Township Attorney Gene Anthony told her that the enforcement officer – Bill Doolittle, director of construction and code enforcement – had discretion under the ordinance to follow either the Demolition by Neglect procedures or those of the property maintenance laws. Doolittle’s power of discretion stems from a sentence in the Demolition by Neglect ordinance which states: “Nothing herein shall restrict or otherwise prohibit the Construction Official [Doolittle] from acting in accordance with applicable state regulations, building codes or municipal building codes.” (This language is not crystal clear.)

Committeewoman Mary Beth Jahn told Arlt that the problem with going the Demolition by Neglect route is that the HPC has no enforcement power, whereas Code Enforcement does: it can issue summonses. Yet the Demolition by Neglect ordinance gives the HPC the power to “direct the issuance of a … summons” to a non-responsive owner. That seems like enforcement power.

Another section of the ordinance says that if an owner fails to make repairs as ordered, the HPC may request the Township to undertake those repairs and then to place a lien on the property to recoup its costs. This also seems like a useful enforcement tool. When the Township places a lien, it then turns around and auctions off the lien to a third party, so it gets its money right back. One or two Ocean Grovers, commenting on this blog, have suggested doing that very thing with some of our derelict properties.

But the truth is, the HPC seems now to have lost its appetite for proceeding under Demolition by Neglect. The Township Committee also seems more comfortable with having Bill Doolittle call the shots. In the end, our concerns about which procedures to follow won’t matter much if the Township, one way or the other, succeeds in solving the problem of derelict houses in Ocean Grove. And we really hope it does succeed.

-0-

UPDATE: At the end of Tuesday evening’s meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission, a wide-ranging discussion broke out about the Demolition by Neglect ordinance. Kathy Arlt of Ocean Grove described her efforts to get the Township to take the ordinance seriously. Members of the Commission made it pretty clear that, as a way to save derelict buildings, they consider the ordinance pretty near useless. Commission member Cathleen Crandall said such ordinances are “almost impossible to enforce.” The HPC’s chairwoman, Deborah Osepchuk, said it is almost impossible to inspect a house if the owner refuses access to the inspector, which commonly happens. Inspections, of course, are an essential part of what the ordinance is all about.

It was a painful conversation to listen to.

Read Full Post »

The Sampler in its heyday. Photo from the Historical Society of Ocean Grove

(Continued from previous page)

The neighbors complained, negotiated and endured through a succession of owners from the 1990s into the mid-2000s. During that time The Sampler followed the general trend of the Ocean Grove hotel business, which was downward. Still, the neighbors said they were usually able to deal amicably with the various owners until, in 2004, two brothers from Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Marshall and Elliott Koplitz, acquired the property. In 2006 the Koplitz brothers filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. By then the building was vacant and deteriorating very badly.

For a time, the Koplitzes tried to develop plans to convert the property to condominiums. This led to meetings before various governmental bodies. It was at this point that the residents became truly organized. They liked the idea that The Sampler, a historic and once-attractive building, might be saved. But when the architect proposed 15 or more condo units on the site, they recoiled. What about parking for all those residents? What about the garbage and trash so many condos would generate? Also, at this time, condos were a relatively new thing for Ocean Grove, and the residents thought condos would change the character of the neighborhood. “It was a risk,” Carmen Rivera said.

There were also concerns about the trustworthiness of the Koplitzes.

The Koplitzes had owned properties in Long Branch in the 1990s that were cited repeatedly for serious fire code violations. Outstanding fines eventually totaled more than $1 million on these properties. The Koplitzes staged a protracted court battle before settling with the city for $400,000. Many of the violations centered on the fact that the Koplitzes were packing their properties with college students. The loud, unruly behavior at some of these “animal houses,” as they were sometimes called, became widely known; charges included underage drinking, providing liquor to minors and maintaining a nuisance.

Jay Shapiro: “We were worried about whether we were going to have college kids living here. It was going to be worse than condominiums, because at least with condominiums there’d be home ownership…. But with college kids, we figured there would be drinking, partying late at night, and it would just really destroy the whole flavor of the neighborhood. I think that was what started to get us up in arms.”

The Koplitzes were more secretive than previous owners, and far less cooperative. The Sampler bankruptcy was complicated and poorly understood.  “Whenever you tried to get hold of anyone,” Sue Beneke remembered, “you never could tell who the real owners were.”

Jeff Dean said by the time he moved onto Heck, in 2006, The Sampler building was already a fire hazard. Homeless people were breaking in and occupying it. Intruders stole copper and other metal, stripping the building of anything that could be sold.

Cracking wall. Photo by Danny Beaman

Sue Beneke: “In the back yard there were so many things that they had done that were illegal.” Heavy air conditioning units were above the kitchen, she said, “and the wall was starting to break. It was just cracking and you’d watch it crack, and then they’d put a board up, and the board held it for a while.” One of the walls appeared ready to collapse, which “was terrifying,” she said, especially considering that children would often explore and play around the building.

There was a moment when the neighbors more or less concluded among themselves that if the developer would agree to a lower number of condo units — maybe as few as 10 — they would probably go along.

Shapiro: “We were willing to compromise.”

Beaman: “Because he was going to save The Sampler building.”

And then things got worse. Around 2007 the real estate market was starting to tank. And the plans for condos just went away. So did the Koplitzes. The building sat unoccupied and continued to rot. Glass fell from the third floor onto the sidewalks. Scraps from the roof went flying around the neighborhood in the wind.

The neighbors had been alerting the Township to problems at The Sampler for at least 10 years — through a series of administrations, both Republican and Democratic. But The Sampler was not the only place in Ocean Grove that was in decline. “Back in the late ’90s there was a dilapidated building on every block,” Beaman said. “So when we started complaining to the town, it was a little harder for the town to hear us because there were so many of these buildings. But I think The Sampler went to a degree that no other building in Ocean Grove went to.”

So now the neighbors took their protests to a higher level of organization. “It got to the point where we were emailing [Township Committee members] every week, and we were going down to see them in person,” Jeff Dean said. They also reached out to county freeholders, a state senator — anyone they could find who would listen. “We kept on complaining every chance we had,” said Shapiro.

“We started documenting everything,” Beaman said. “Once every three months I was emailing pictures of the roof collapsing, the walls collapsing, things falling off, and sending it to the town council.”

Rivera called 911 every time she saw teenagers entering The Sampler or hanging out on the steps. She was calling as many as three times a week. Sue Beneke sent photographs to state officials. Shapiro and Beaman became leaders in speaking out at public meetings, but others attended in support and sometimes spoke. “Just about everyone on the street at one time did something,” Beaman said.

Heck Ave. view shot by Danny Beaman. The Sampler is at right and in the background. The small derelict home on the left was attached to The Sampler. To its left, partly visible, is the Benekes' home.

By now most of the neighbors had pretty much concluded that the building could not be saved and therefore had to be demolished. This became the group’s goal. But forced demolition of someone’s private property was a drastic step. It required formal action by the Township Committee. It was not something politicians normally liked to do.

Several things were working in favor of the residents’ lobbying campaign, though. One was that almost everyone on their block was a full-time resident, which was not the norm in Ocean Grove. This made it easier for them to persist, year after year and in all seasons. Emails flew back and forth. They strategized constantly while sitting on their porches. They did their research, built a case.

Another thing that worked for the neighbors, they said, was that Marshall Koplitz, by his hostile behavior, had alienated Township officials.

Jeff Dean: “Koplitz started screwing with them. His lawyer actually attacked the integrity of the officials in meetings, openly attacking their credentials and everything else.” By contrast, the neighbors tried to present themselves as firm and determined but also reasonable and respectful.

Really, though, The Sampler was now in such bad shape that no one could deny the truth. Jay Shapiro remembers a particularly effective speech that resident Donny Noll made one evening. The Nolls had been trying to sell their house, and their realtor had told them that being on the same block as The Sampler severely diminished the market value. Noll told officials, “I cannot sell my house because of that eyesore across the street.”

A resident who lived on Main Avenue got up at a meeting one night and said, “My daughter’s bedroom is five feet from The Sampler. Can you guarantee me that my child will be safe?” Such arguments were irrefutable.

At last, in 2009, the Township Committee declared that The Sampler was “a danger to life and health” and had to be torn down. Fire and code officials affirmed that the building could easily go up in flames. There was no fire alarm system, one inspector testified, and “depending on wind conditions, you could lose the entire block if a fire started.”

The Koplitzes denied all of that and appealed the Committee’s decision in court, but to no avail.

On the day a bulldozer, hired by the Township, went to work knocking down The Sampler, Danny Beaman was on his porch snapping photos and emailing them to people who were out of town. People emailed him back, saying, “Send more. Send more. ”

In the end, though, the neighbors both rejoiced and mourned. “It was sad,” Susan Bell recalled.

“A bittersweet victory,” said Shapiro.

“I never felt like we won,” Beaman chimed in, “because if we’d won they would have taken care of the property.”

After The Sampler’s destruction, the zoning of the site reverted to single-family homes. It is likely that such homes will be built there eventually.  “Whatever goes up there,” Beaman said, “we’re not going to be afraid of it. And that’s the big thing.”

-0-

Editor’s note: to return to the Blogfinger main page, hit your browser’s back button. Please post your comments on that page rather than here.

Read Full Post »

William Doolittle (right) addressing the Home Owners Association. Committeeman Randy Bishop looks on. Photo by Mary Walton

By Charles Layton

Saturday, February 26 — Today’s meeting of the Ocean Grove Home Owners Association featured a wide-ranging discussion of derelict buildings — how the Township addresses the problem, why it takes so long to get results, and how citizens can help.

The guest speaker, William Doolittle, said when he became Neptune’s director of Code and Construction two years ago, he compiled a list of more than 40 deteriorating structures needing immediate attention. (Around City Hall, it’s known as “the ugly list.”)

“We’ve gotten rid of about half of those structures,” he said, either by demolishing them or forcing the owners to make repairs. The only such building to be demolished in Ocean Grove, he said, was the Sampler Inn in 2009.

Because of budget cuts, Doolittle’s staff of six building inspectors was reduced to three last year, and the number of secretaries in Code Enforcement was cut from two to one. Doolittle told me before the meeting that he didn’t expect these staff cuts to reduce the number of inspections his department conducts for code violations. However, Doolittle and Committeeman Randy Bishop, today’s other guest speaker, said the loss of staff may make Neptune more dependent on citizens’ tips.

“We count on you guys greatly for your eyes and your ears, to let us know what’s going on out there,” Doolittle told the group. When one member of the audience said it is sometimes difficult for citizens to know what constitutes a code violation, Bishop said, “If it looks bad enough to you, report a violation.”

Doolittle said it’s helpful if the person reporting the problem can provide photos. He said the identities of persons reporting on their neighbors’ properties will be kept confidential.

Both officials spoke of the time-consuming nature of the Township’s efforts to force an owner to save a deteriorating building.

Audience member Kathy Arlt spoke for many when she asked why the Township seems to allow buildings to reach an extreme state of disrepair before taking serious action. “Why aren’t violations being written earlier?” she asked.

Neither Bishop nor Doolittle quite came to grips with that question, but Doolittle did try to explain some of the procedural barriers to quick action against a derelict building owner. Sometimes, he said, the owner is deceased, or the building is owned by a corporation and it is hard to determine who is the responsible person. Sometimes an owner escapes into bankruptcy. He also spoke of stalling tactics used by some recalcitrant owners. For instance, owners will give his department evidence that they have ordered materials to make repairs, or claim they are in the process of filing a repair proposal with the HPC, in order to get a delay in enforcement; then they will fail to follow through with those plans.

Bringing an owner to court, with all of the legal impediments involved, can take as long as a year, he said, and then after the Township does obtain a court order, the owner can appeal.

“So you can see the frustrations,” Doolittle said. “It may seem like we’re sitting on our hands, but that’s not the case.”

Bishop said the law provides elaborate protections of a property owner’s rights. “That’s how the system works,” he said. In extreme situations, the Township Committee has taken control of an unsafe building in order to have it demolished, Bishop said, but “it’s not something the governing body does frivolously.”

-0-

Several reports by HOA officials followed the main speakers. Barbara Burns reported that the organization hopes to have a new website up and running by the end of March. She showed screen projections of what some of the site’s pages will look like. The site will allow people to send questions to the HOA. People will also be able to sign up to receive email notices of meetings and other information, she said, and the minutes of meetings will be published

Ann Horan, the HOA treasurer, said annual membership dues will be increased this year from $8 to $10. This is because the organization’s expenses are starting to exceed its income. The HOA has been losing members, she explained.

Joan Caputo, newly appointed as a trustee, will head a membership committee that will seek to recruit new members.

Joan Venezia heads a new six-member committee on the North End Redevelopment. The committee, she said, will be seeking ideas on how to make the project “more favorable to the residents” of Ocean Grove. Anyone wishing to pass along a suggestion, idea or concern to this committee can send an email to OGNorthEnd@gmail.com.

Eventually, the committee will bring a set of recommendations before the membership. Once approved, those will be passed on to the Township officials who are negotiating the project’s details with the developers.

And finally, Kennedy Buckley, an HOA trustee, is collecting suggestions for improving Ocean Grove’s parking situation. Anyone with an idea to share can email Buckley at poppop.12@verizon.net.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »