Scene: The coffee bar at Ocean Wegman’s. Two employees are discussing what they did the day before
He: “Yesterday I went to Asbury Park to take a walk on the boardwalk. I parked in Ocean Grove because they have free parking. Most other shore towns, except maybe Spring Lake, have meters.”
She: “I know. I do the same thing. The Asbury meters can get expensive at $2.00 or more per hour.”
Editor’s note: About 6 months ago we reported that Asbury employees such as restaurant workers are intentionally going straight to Ocean Grove for parking, especially at the north end near Wesley Lake and behind the Windmill. From there they walk a few blocks to work by crossing the access bridge nearby.
This has proven to make parking an even bigger issue for those of us who live in that part of the Grove. We live near that access bridge and we often see visitors, mostly 20 and 30 somethings, pile out of a car, often trailing suitcases, as they head for the New Jersey Avenue bridge to A.Park. And there are large numbers who, heading for dinner out or bar hopping, do the same thing except without the suitcases. And then they come back late and loud.
This is a new and growing situation which we first reported on in 2015.
The conversation above indicates that the knowledge about free parking in OG has spread to a wider circle of parking manipulators.
Here is a link to the night life in A. Park post written last year on Blogfinger, and it is a must re-read:
Entrance to Ocean Grove at Main Avenue. Blogfinger photo.
FROM FRAN HOPKINS:
I had to read and re-read the two Neptune Township letter excerpts* a few times until I finally “got it.” In 2005, Neptune Township asked that it be allowed to require only on-street parking in Ocean Grove. The State said “no.” In 2009, the Township asked a second time, but rephrased the request to ask that it be allowed to prohibit off-street parking in Ocean Grove. This is the same thing, just worded differently, if I’m understanding this correctly; and again, the state said “no.” The 2005 Township request said that it would apply to “future residential development”; the 2009 request said it would be “new residential development.”
In denying its repeated requests to not have to require off-street parking in Ocean Grove, the State reminded the Township that, since 1997–eight and 12 years, respectively, before Neptune made these requests–Neptune (of which Ocean Grove is a part) had been required, by law, to comply with the RSIS standards (including the parking requirements).
Also, the State’s 2005 letter was clear that RSIS applies to “all site improvements” involving residential development. The State didn’t limit RSIS’s applicability to new development only; yet that’s what the Township specified in its subsequent 2009 request. I don’t know enough about this to know the differences in meaning among “future residential development,” “new residential development,” and “all site improvements for residential development,” but I would think that the State’s wording is much broader.
So if I’m a reader who knows nothing about this situation except what I’ve read in these letter excerpts, I can only conclude that:
1. From 1997 through 2005, the Township complied with RSIS and required off-street parking in Ocean Grove for all site improvements for residential development, since apparently it didn’t ask the State during this time to permit it to NOT comply.
2. From 2005 through 2009, Neptune Township continued to adhere to the RSIS standards (including those related to parking) in Ocean Grove because the State affirmed in response to the Township’s 2005 request that its compliance was required by law.
3. From 2009 through the present, the Township remained, and remains, in compliance with RSIS standards because the State reiterated in 2009 that the Township (including Ocean Grove) was legally required to comply.
I’m sure I’m oversimplifying this, but is my reasoning correct? If it is, then do my conclusions accurately describe what’s occurred in Ocean Grove since 1997? If not, why? Despite what the State said, are there/have there been legal ways for Neptune Township to bypass RSIS? For example, would non-compliance be legally possible because of Ocean Grove’s Historic District designation? But if that were the case, then why did the State deny a non-compliance request for Ocean Grove twice?
I did come across the December 17, 2015 minutes of the NJ Site Improvement Advisory Board (SIAB) that Blogfinger and others attended. I saw a statement in there in response to comments by Kevin Chambers:
“Chairman Doyle and Ms. McKenzie responded by explaining that enforcement is a local issue. Towns have the ability to reduce the parking required for a specific project. There is flexibility built into the parking requirements in the rules. Notice is provided to the Board when a de minimis exception or agreement to exceed has been approved to enable the Board to continue to review the rules, and to make revisions, when necessary. Chairman Doyle added that any evidence of corruption should be reported to the proper agencies.”
Was the SIAB saying that it’s OK to make “exceptions” to the parking requirements, as long as SIAB is notified? Has the Township been doing this? Maybe not, and perhaps that’s why its “special area standards” applications have been denied — because the SIAB knows full well that the Township has been disregarding the RSIS standards all along.
The thing I’m still not “getting” is how it could be that residential development that’s not in compliance with state standards–i.e., that’s illegal–has been going on in Ocean Grove for 20 years. I was an Ocean Grove homeowner for only a short time and hope that longer-time residents can explain this.
I do know that the extreme lack of convenient parking, which was only getting worse, was one of the main reasons I decided I had to leave last summer. It’s unbelievable and upsetting to think that the people whom residents entrusted with the care of this uniquely beautiful little area are the ones who let this happen.
Why does Ocean Grove remain part of Neptune Township? I know a vote to secede from the Township failed in 1980 (although a majority of Ocean Grove voters were in favor of the move). It may be time to try again.
Editor’s note: We welcome Fran Hopkins’ attempt to penetrate what seems almost impenetrable. The RSIS story in Ocean Grove is complex, so her summary and her questions are well worth airing out now for a 2017 update.
And, here is a link to a 2011 Blogfinger post, updated to 2015, where Kevin Chambers offers a brilliant summary regarding this issue. Don’t miss Kevin’s discussion by clicking on the link below.
In a Coaster article (Jan. 25, 2017) it was reported that the Township Committee approved “almost 100 new parking spaces”and that the Committee was “acting on recommendations presented by the ad hoc OG Parking Task Force.” That task force has members on it from the OGHOA.
The plan includes creating diagonal head-on parking on the north side of Main Ave. from New Jersey Ave. to Lawrence Ave. The same is planned on the west side of Central Avenue from Heck to Webb avenues.
But diagonal parking is ugly. The “new spaces” are created by cramming more cars into a given space where currently there is parallel parking. Diagonal parking may be OK for commercial areas, but in residential areas it is not suitable.
On Main Avenue, starting from the eastern edge of Firemen’s Park and heading west, the diagonal parking will look congested and will visually and actually narrow Main Avenue. Currently that portion of the Avenue has an impressive and welcoming boulevard look.
For visitors who come into our historic town, they will not enjoy the same openness that currently shows off the Grove at its best with historic homes and a lovely park. In addition the town will lose one of the few places where a bus or truck can legally pull over and give some respite for the drivers to get their bearings or have a coffee.
As for how our leaders feel about this idea, here are two quotes borrowed from the Coaster:
Deputy Mayor Nick Williams, a member of the Township’s parking task force said, “We are going to move forward with these recommendations, and I think the task force did a good job.”
Resident Joyce Klein who is a member of the OGHOA and chairman of their parking committee said, “This is a great start* but I hope to think that this is the beginning and not the end of the parking study.” She is also on the task force.
So we will get some more spaces, but we don’t need more congestion and density as the price to pay in our residential areas while the town continues its slide downhill. The policy makers think that this will be wonderful, but do you think these task force people are doing the right thing?
It seems that they believe that all Grovers care about is parking and that we will accept any new spaces no matter the price. Do you think the task force gave any consideration to the appearance of our town—–how about the more important variables such as air, space and light? How about our quality of life?
This plan of squeezing more cars onto our streets fits in with the worrisome current pattern of more condos, more density, and more crowding. Making more spaces is not necessarily better than leaving those streets alone.
Who is this really helping?–the commercial and real estate interests, or the people who live here? Help the residents with parking stickers and do something to reduce the numbers of cars coming into town and the number of town-clogging events that are too often and create temporary paralysis for OG tax payers. Or build a parking garage somewhere.
This plan will be implemented by Memorial Day. Other ideas are also being considered, including even more diagonal parking on other parts of Central Avenue.
When it comes to policies that hurt our historic town, if no one complains, they will soon do it again:
Main Avenue in the commercial area. Diagonal parking, an eyesore, is offensive to anybody’s sense of beauty. Blogfinger photo April 2017.
Firemen’s Park. Two truckers stop for a rest along the edge of our park on Main Avenue. The openness is welcomed, and only parallel parking should be continued there. Imagine how this airy view will be when the Neptunites install diagonal parking. Blogfinger photo April 17, 2017.
By Paul Goldfinger, Editor, Blogfinger.net. April, 2017.
As I drove along Main Avenue a few days ago, I saw a bus resting along the edge of Firemen’s Park. It is not an uncommon sight, as drivers seek a respite—one of the few such places in Ocean Grove. In addition, from a beautification point of view, the vista across Firemen’s Park towards Main Avenue is beautiful and is enjoyed by all who live around the park, visit the park regularly, or just walk there as part of a strolling experience in that part of town.
For those who drive into Ocean Grove, it is the first scenic view they have, coupled with the historic architecture in that neighborhood. It is also the last scenic event as they drive out of town.
Soon the Township will add a significant dose of ugliness by placing diagonal parking along the Main Avenue edge of the park. Ugh!
Why do we allow those Yahoos at the Mother Ship, in partnership with insensitive Grovers on the Parking Task Force, to make our picturesque town progressively repugnant-looking, one inch at a time?
Send an email, an old fashioned letter, a phone call or even a fly-over banner drone addressed to Mayor Michael Brantley* and tell him that we want his support to stop the vilification of historic Ocean Grove.
His administration refers to us as the Neptune “Historic District.” Since when is diagonal parking historic? Tell him that in 19th century OG even the horses could not be parked that way.
This ongoing indifference to the beauty of our town must be stopped or we will look like another crappy shore town clogged with cars, dumpsters, crowds, and ugliness.
drmbrantley@Neptunetownship.org*
p.s. Jack Bredin says,
“The lyrics from the song by the Eurythmics tells us ‘Some of them want to abuse you, Some of them want to be abused.’
“They could be describing Neptune’s relationship with many apathetic OG property owners.”
As they used to say in Star Trek: “Space— the final frontier” But here in Ocean Grove it is parking spaces—-the final frontier :
In Ocean Grove it always comes down to parking and land usage and abuses. On our block on Main and Beach, The Henry Richard Inn is now being remodeled and converted into a single family home. Along Main Avenue, Mary’s place is now chock-full of volunteers’ cars and resident cars.
Yes, even after Labor Day, we can look west down the block and see no spots available on the south side of the street and some have even migrated onto Beach Avenue, making it a bit more challenging for the folks on Beach to find spaces in front of their own condo. So, while we have lost the Henry Richard’s parking challenges in the summer, we are now looking at folks finding spaces when we ordinarily could park without a single thought after Labor Day.
If we add to this the family on Main next to the old Henry Richard, we are now getting one or two of their fleet of cars now parking on Beach to add to our agita. Of course, that is the family and house that at time commandeers more than five or six spots on the south side of Main. The ritual of pulling out cars and replacing the space with motor bikes and schoolers is most entertaining on a summer’s day.
Ocean Grove has always been described as a “quirky” place. The owners of Mary’s Place along Main on the south side I do not think ever contacted or considered their new neighbors to be; instead, we saw the full use of those two building lots right to the very edge of the property lines.
It’s a done deal for a good cause, but those who objected to the aggressive use of that property were characterized as heartless and uncaring, and so it goes in Ocean Grove. Neighbors were worried about trucks, but what has happened is that parking in the usual Ocean Grove way has become a real issue for many.
All this, while there are spots galore on the north side in front of the convent and across the street in front of the Majestic, After all it is autumn in Ocean Grove and the streets are emptier as usual, but somehow, the big house that is Mary’s Place continues to add to our parking woes.
When will we get “residential” parking permits for people who pay taxes in Neptune and who pay the outrageous ground rents to a non-profit authority?
JESSE
Ocean Grove, N.J. Sept. 26, 2016.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Below is a quote from our article about Mary’s Place dated September 19, 2014:
“When people walk by Mary’s Place, they won’t admire its beauty; instead they will ask, “Who was responsible for allowing this out-of-place building to be constructed in this quaint, historic, residential town? ” They will ask why two fine Victorian single family houses were not placed there instead, like we now have on the Pathway. And they will see the parking problems and congestion due to the 10 clients staying there, the staff who will be needed to maintain the place, the visitors, and the rest of the support team who teach yoga, etc. Then there will be the deliveries, laundry trucks, garbage pickups, etc.”
And yes, we did get hate mail over our opposition to the Mary’s Place zoning decisions. But we also received support from commenters to that editorial.
From Grover 666: “Some people are morally handicapped: If they don’t have a phony handicapped sticker they reserve their own parking spot by putting an orange cone, a garbage can, or a chair on the street in front of their house.”
Editor’s note: This comment was originally posted in relation to non-handicapped individuals parking in handicapped spaces. But, three years ago, there was a related Blogfinger discussion on this subject as it pertains to holding regular spaces in the Grove. It is especially a problem after a snowstorm.
If you actually attend a Neptune Township Committee meeting, you will hear only what is scripted in the agenda. After several hours of hanging around, you can go to the microphone and offer a 5 minute opinion, but none of the robots on the dais will actually have a conversation with you. They may say, “Your time is up.” Or they may ask a police officer to force you to sit down, or they may say something like, “We’ll look into that.” So no one really expects them to offer much in the way of explanations or opinions when they face the public. Luckily, whatever you might say is recorded and may actually be documented in the minutes
However, amazingly, on June 30. 2016, they sent a letter to the editor of the Coaster to explain some things to us Grovers. This is unprecedented , so it must really be important.
In the letter they explain that two members left early during the infamous Parking Committee meeting of a few weeks ago because they had to attend a memorial service for Orlando victims. Apparently the Committee doesn’t mind being accused of malfeasance ( eg the RSIS controversy), because they never respond to those opinions, but now they had to go public to say why they cut the meeting short.
Here are some quotes from that Coaster letter. You can judge it for yourselves. None of the Committeemen (and one woman) actually signed the letter using their actual names.
“It is a false impression that the concerns of Ocean Grove residents regarding parking were not being fully addressed”
“In relation to the parking issue, we take great pride in our efforts to make sure Neptune Township truly is a place where ‘community, business and tourism prosper.’ (Can anyone say “non sequitur?” )
“…we will continue to focus on this issue while considering the effect our actions will have on the entirety of Neptune Township” (Anyone want to explain this statement?)
“In addition to the establishment of this Advisory Board (ie the Parking Task Force) we have also requested that the Neptune Township Business Administrator seek immediate solutions that can be implemented in the short term, and not be held up due to the necessary process actions which the municipal Committee must go though. We expect residents will see some changes in the coming weeks.”
(So, one bureaucrat at the Mother Ship will prepare some sort of “immediate solutions” without letting those solutions be examined first by the citizens? Who’s to say we will like those “solutions?” Can you say “transparency?” Does the Committte now rule OG by edict? Is this the slippery slope in action? )
“As elected officials our jobs are to listen to, and act on, the concerns of all of the residents we serve…….We have no greater obligation than to make our Township an even better one to live and raise a family in.” (Editor’s note: “Really?”)
Can any of you find any specific information regarding parking in this letter which was entitled “Parking Changes will be Coming Soon.” Can you find anything besides platitudes and political double talk?
JACK JOHNSON “Anything but the Truth”
“What is this place? Who am I? Why did we come here?”
Autos jammed in on the Saturday of Bridgefest. Delaware Avenue. Blogfinger photo, June 25, 2016
Paul: I’m sad to leave, but on the other hand, logistics in Ocean Grove are not favorable for aging Baby Boomers. It’s unbelievable to me that even Arlington Court, a 55-plus coop complex, has no parking spots for its senior (not me of course!) residents.
One of my neighbors in Arlington told me that she’d invited her elderly (but still driving) mother down to visit but her mother turned her down because she’d have to park too far away. It’s hard to understand why those responsible for development in the town allowed this to happen. It’s a major inconvenience that affects so many aspects of people’s daily lives.
Fran Hopkins
June 26, 2016
Editor’s note: Do you get far away eyes when this subject comes up? Here are the Rolling Stones:
Editor’s note: Phillip Orton, Ph.D., a new addition to the pantheon of Grovers, has made some recent comments regarding our piece about the lawsuit at #50 Main Avenue. Along the way he became interested in the subject of parking in the Grove, especially as it relates to the North End, so we are handing the podium to him for a guest editorial:
I should have made it clearer earlier — I am not talking specifically about the case in this post, which is one of law. I’m talking about the broader parking/development issues for Ocean Grove, here.
New developments, or not, Ocean Grove will be saddled with a huge parking problem in summer and especially when there are special events. Has there been much brainstorming about broad solutions to this problem? I presume so, but if so then I’m late to the conversation.
As you and I once discussed, if a North End development goes in with ample parking, there may be traffic problems as it’s a corner of town with poor access. So the solution at North End may not be more parking. And this leads to your very reasonable suggestion that we must have “one unit per lot” instead.
But I think there are many people like me, who would rather see something more reflective of the historical character of the North End area — a hotel, shops, and a bathhouse which were on that site.
Here are some ideas that might make a difference for the parking problem —
Parking permits and special curbside parking spots (with signs) that are only for residents, perhaps one per house, just to make sure everyone has at least one option.
Perhaps during summer and events, there could be parking provided elsewhere in Neptune, and shuttles every 10 minutes (just circling). Seems tough and not like a popular idea, but it might be seen as a better alternative than circling for an hour looking for a spot.
Perhaps there could be some kind of high-profile shuttle to and from the Asbury Park train station, looping to the beach and back. Tiki bar in the back … okay maybe not!
I personally anticipate that the region (Asbury, first) will slowly join the trend that many other medium-density towns in the US are already seeing — a slow movement toward reduced car ownership. Things like car sharing are coming. Uber is already here, and a way for people like me to occasionally do things I can’t do by bike/foot.
A modest investment in the existing rail corridor could greatly improve movement north-south along the shore and bring a lot of excitement and investment in transit-oriented development. I could go on and on …
I have lived and worked in places that are already doing this, for nearly 20 years (Portland, Hoboken). There are many people who want walkable towns and transit-oriented development, and are ready to own 0 or 1 car per housing unit.
This would be a great thing for Ocean Grove, a town of small lots and no driveways that was built before cars, largely around walking and train transportation.
New development could occur, yet parking availability could be improved, if diverse and creative minds get together to problem-solve and come up with some big ideas to take advantage of these trends.
Hi. We are retiring in May and will be living in Ocean Grove full time. We live in the 1st floor apt. of our Victorian that has an apt. on each of the 3 floors.
We enjoy the challenge of not moving our car all weekend and staying put in this lovely town. However, I’m not stupid either, and if we allow the remaining buildings to turn condo with no parking, on top of the parking encroachment from Asbury Park’s growing popularity (which is a good thing)….it will be a bad thing for OG.
Can you suggest on Blogfinger whom we can write to in Trenton so they don’t listen to our town officials who have an obvious conflict of interest.
Thank you for all that you do.
ANNABEL BISSET
Ocean Grove, N.J. Jan. 21, 2016.
EDITOR’S NOTE: You can write to the Residential Site Improvement Standards (RSIS) Committee regarding the Neptune Township application to obtain a special exemption to the parking rules (RSIS) that require new construction to provide off street parking in Ocean Grove.
It is the Blogfinger position that such an exemption will open the door for more multifamily buildings such as condos. Currently the Township simply ignores the law and thus we get condos without parking, such as the giant one on the south side of Ocean Pathway.
Note that the application currently is inactive. But the Township can resubmit it (and probably will) in the near future, so go ahead and write the DCA.
The address is RSIS Committee, NJ Department of Community Affairs, 101 S. Broad Street, Trenton, NJ , 08625 or send an email to john.lago@DCA.NJ.GOV
Editor’s note: Some of you may have missed this piece when we posted it last month on Christmas Eve. It is about how the Home Groaners Association has taken the side of developers regarding RSIS.
Moving this piece to the top is needed because the OGHOA is about to present a “forum” on this subject. But they should not be moderating this forum because their main purpose is to defend their anti-Ocean Grove position regarding this topic.
If the forum is ever held, keep in mind that an unbiased presentation is not possible under the auspices of this group who would back the conversion of old rooming houses and hotels into condos, and if you think that there are no more such buildings in town, here is one at 17 Embury Ave. that so far has slipped under their radar. I passed it today quite by accident. Jan 21, 2016. Ocean Grove, NJ
The Seacrest Manor is for sale at 17 Embury Ave. —-a choice location. Paul Goldfinger photo Jan 21, 2016 I told my wife never to put me into a place with the word “manor” in its name.
The below post was originally published on Dec. 24, 2015:
In a memo to its members the OGHOA President Ann Horan declared “The HOA supports the township’s effort to secure a Special Area Standard for Ocean Grove.”
In her long note, full of head-spinning irrelevances, Horan tries to create fear and confusion by discussing standards that have nothing to do with our current situation including sanitary sewers, yellow striped boxes, parking stalls , etc. She says that enforcing the RSIS rules in OG would be “a disaster.” This outrageous and fearsome characterization is based on absolutely nothing.
The truth is that the special area under discussion is only about off-street parking and street widths. The latter is not even an issue, because our street widths are pretty well set.
Not only is the HOA betraying historic Ocean Grove by this announcement, but they doubled down by sending a letter to the SIAB in Trenton explaining why it is essential that the new standard be adopted “in order to prevent a bad situation from becoming worse.”
The explanations by Horan in these two documents are outrageous and plain wrong. She can’t even get the date of last week’s meeting correct.
The people of Ocean Grove need to insist that the HOA do the right thing before we are inundated by more condominiums, townhouses, conversions to apartments, big buildings like Mary’s Place, etc.
Blogfinger has explained our position already to our readers pointing out that granting the requested exemption will open the doors to developers. We want the RSIS regulations to be retained for all structures in town except for single family homes. Horan doesn’t seem to understand what we are talking about.
The Editor’s note below regarding the position advocated by myself, Jack Bredin and Kevin Chambers sums up our views, which are opposite that of the HOA:
Editor’s Note: Here is the “hook” regarding the RSIS rules. If someone wants to put up a condo building with the RSIS standards in place, then it will be impossible for them to comply, because they would have to put the parking on their lot or lots. Since that would be impossible in most situations, then a single family house or an empty lot is the only option.
Single family houses should get the exemption from the State because if someone wants to put up a single family house, there will be no room for the required driveway and parking. So the exemption for them would create a single family Victorian house with no driveway or garage, a situation that is not only historic but is very Grovey. —-Paul Goldfinger, Editor @Blogfinger
We know that this subject is a bit hard to understand, but here is another practical example, different from above, taken from the perspective of what the HOA and the Township are advocating:
Suppose the HOA/Township viewpoint is accepted by the SIAB, and the exemption is granted for every project in town. The next time a developer buys a derelict old inn, razes it, and proposes condos, they will be permitted to do so without having to supply any parking.
So all the people who live in that condo building will be looking for on-street parking along with their friends, party-goers, and relatives, resulting in reduced parking for residents and increased congestion for that neighborhood. Every new multi-residential structure that is permitted will negatively impact our lifestyles and endanger our historic designations and and our town’s character.
It is as simple as that, so don’t be mesmerized by Ann Horan’s unbelievably disloyal and destructive position on behalf of the HOA as she stands shoulder to shoulder with the Neptune Township Committee, supporting their phony rationale for requesting the Special Area Parking Standards.
STUFFY SHMITT. This song is about good ideas…something the Home Groaners should find out about
This appeared in 2013, so it is fun and timely to post it again..And don’t fail to read the 34 comments. Do your homework for the HOA parking forum on Jan 23.
Use the BF search engine on the top of the page and search under parking, RSIS, etc. Don’t let the Home Groaners Board steamroll you with their usual lawyerly, pedantic propaganda.
