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.