Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘North End Plan for Ocean Grove’

Modern OG history—2017: Do the right thing: Time to kill the dormant North End Redevelopment Plan.

Posted in Blogfinger Presents, Ocean Grove North End Redevelopment Plan, tagged on November 21, 2025| 4 Comments »

The North End along its northern edge near Wesley Lake. Blogfinger photo © 2015.

 

Condolandia (North End) as seen from Surf Avenue in 2015. Blogfinger photo ©

 

By Paul Goldfinger, MD  Editor @Blogfinger.net

For the last ten years, the North End Redevelopment Plan (NERP)  has been kept under wraps for obscure reasons.  Instead of moving ahead with something that would be good for the town of Ocean Grove and for this region of the Jersey Shore, that large dirt zone has been allowed to fester by the Neptune Township Committee.

Why do you suppose the Committee would stick with a flawed and failed project?   Whose side are they on—the developers or the community of Ocean Grove.?   Since this plan was approved, no re-developer has ever been chosen. There is no re-developer’s agreement.

When that plan was conceived in 2007 , it was said to be immediately necessary to bring that property to life. It was called an “area in need of redevelopment.” For some reason, the Township decided that the property owner, the Camp Meeting Association, was incapable of developing that valuable piece of land on their own.   They said that local government must take over.

The Township Committee ruled that the zoning had to be changed from 25 single family homes to a major commercial enterprise with 165 residential units—mostly condos, plus a hotel, stores, and an underground garage.

Was anyone fooled by that nonsense?  Even a blind man could see through it. Did we really need to turn the OG North End into Asbury Park South?  Was that going to save the town?   Or was that going to save Neptune Township?

The misguided concept was approved despite the Planning Board’s Master Plan for the “historic district.”

Everyone knew that it was just trickery to allow developers to make a ton of money once the zoning change had been allowed.  What is the motive for the Township to turn its back on its citizens?  Is it only about ratables?   Are there other variables such as special treatment for certain OG investors or for CMA trustees?  It’s ironic, but many of those 25 properties were originally earmarked for CMA religious leaders.

This is what the NJ Land Use Law said back then about redevelopment projects:   “Historically, redevelopment was primarily envisioned for totally deteriorated, blighted urban ghettos.”

 

For the last ten years,  our elected officials have allowed the NERP  to fester while developers figured out what to do, and there still are no answers and no progress.  The only one who spoke out in support of the people was Mary Beth Jahn, former Committeewoman, who was forced out by her own party.

 

On  January 1, 2018, a new administration will be sworn in, including a new mayor.   It would seem like an opportune time to do something which should have been done years ago:  They should  nullify the NERP and restore the original zoning.

Then maybe the CMA will start construction on those 25 homes—something which should have been  accomplished a long time ago.  By now we could have had a  beautiful residential area at the North End, with off-street parking.

Below are some notes about redevelopment plans per the New Jersey Land Use Laws:

a.   ” No permit for the erection of any building or structure shall be issued unless the lot abuts a street giving access to such proposed building or structure.

b.   “A delineated area may be determined to be in need of rehabilitation if the governing body of the municipality determines by resolution that there exist in that area certain conditions   (pick one)  such that:

“The owner cannot be found; unpaid fines and taxes exist; code violations cannot be rectified;

 

“—-or land that is owned by the municipality, or unimproved vacant land that has remained so for a period of ten years and that by reason of its location, remoteness, lack of means of access to developed sections or portions of the municipality or topography, or nature of the soil, is not likely to be developed through the instrumentality of private capital.”     Source Hill Wallack, LLP

The truth is that the special designation of “area in need of  redevelopment” should never have been granted by the Neptune Township Committee in 2007.

There was no reason to think that the CMA could not have brought their property to life without government help under the original zoning.

Here are two links that address public opinion on this matter:

poll to cancel NERP

Trusting the Township Committee 2017

 

THE TOKENS.  In this song, the lion is a metaphor for the citizens of Ocean Grove.

 

Read Full Post »

Can you make sense of this “notice of hearing” at the Planning Board regarding the North End Redevelopment Plan?

Posted in Blogfinger Presents, tagged on November 11, 2019| 5 Comments »

Page one of notice placed on the fence at the North End Site. Nov. 11, 2019. Blogfinger photo.  Click on it to make it more readable. We photographed this right off the new North End fence. They are looking for “final major site plan approval,” all at once, at this meeting.

 

Page two of hearing notice. Blogfinger photo. They want no variances.

Will the Planning Board allow approvals for this giant project without a careful and detailed presentation before the public? Or is this some sort of flim-flam lawyerly gimmick to put it over on the town of Ocean Grove?  The language used is designed to blow smoke in the face of the citizens.

It’s too bad the Home Groaners won’t show up with a lawyer to advise we the people. But that would never happen; the Groaners are complicit–in bed with the developers and the Township. They have never condemned this Redevelopment plan over the 8 years when they could have mounted an attack against the project.

The meeting is at 7 pm on Nov. 13, 2nd floor meeting room.  Bring you BS detector.

Read Full Post »

North End Redevelopment update September 24, 2018. “Good news coming soon.”

Posted in Blogfinger Presents, Ocean Grove North End Redevelopment Plan, tagged on September 25, 2018|

L1007633

This Township Committee has become an albatross around the necks of Ocean Grovers. Photo on the Ocean Pathway.  Vote them out!   Blogfinger ©

 

At the September 24, 2018 Township Committee meeting, Michael Brantley, who also is on the Mayor’s Negotiating Committee, said that he met with the North End Redeveloper  (OGNED)  about the North End Redevelopment project.

As a result, he said, “I hope to have some very good news about the North End plan before the next month is out.”

This is his way of saying “by the end of October.”  Of course, this announcement now is a nothing-burger.*

But, in view of this  “where’s the beef” moment, let us speculate:

We guess that the Committeeman will announce something that  will please the new Redeveloper so that he might make a ton of money defacing the North End of OG. And/or it is news that will please the Township Committee because of all the tax money.  And/or it will please the CMA for a variety of financial reasons.

What will he have to say that  will please the citizens of Ocean Grove?  Probably “gornish,”  (A Yiddish word which means “nothing.”)

 

Meanwhile, two residents previously asked the Committee to have the Redevelopment Attorney attend this meeting to explain the violations of land use law going on here.  Do you think he came?    Of course, he did not, and this is another example of the massive indifference towards the people of OG by the Township Committee.

 

* Merriam Webster definition:   “The term nothing-burger emerges in the media whenever something is downplayed as irrelevant or insignificant. Although the term itself is not new, it has taken on new life in recent months as the au courant way of saying “there’s nothing to see here.”

 

Committee Theme Song.  “Ain’t Misbehaven.”   HANK WILLIAMS, JR.

 

Read Full Post »

Was the Planning Board’s 2007 decision regarding the North End redevelopment illegal? We have new information.

Posted in Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association, Ocean Grove controversies, Ocean Grove North End Redevelopment Plan, Ocean Grove Topics, Photo news from Ocean Grove, Photography: Ocean Grove Gallery, tagged on July 19, 2015| 6 Comments »

Lake Avenue----the northern edge of OG, west of where the North End zone begins

Lake Avenue—-the northern edge of OG, west of where the North End zone begins. Paul Goldfinger photo.  June, 2015. ©˙  Blogfinger.net. Click to enlarge.

The North End Redevelopment area along its northern edge. Blogfinger.net photo ©

The North End Redevelopment area along its northern edge. Blogfinger.net photo ©

By Paul Goldfinger, Editor @Blogfinger

In our April, 2015 article about the Planning Board’s 2007 decision to recommend designating the North End property as an “area in need of redevelopment,” we mentioned some concerns about the validity of that ruling which would lead to the change in zoning that permitted condos, hotel, underground garage, etc.   ( link to that important article:

Irregularities at the 2007 Planning Board

Since then we have come up with some more information that sheds further doubt on the legality of the resolution.

We ask the question: Did the Planning Board have all the information necessary to make an informed decision when they recommended by resolution, Feb. 28, 2007, that the Township Committee designate the North End “an area in need of redevelopment?”

We believe that critical information was withheld from the Planning Board which may have changed their 2007 decision. Our new evidence suggests that the designation of “area in need of redevelopment ” should never have been recommended.

TIMELINE:

On February 1, 2006, WAVE applied to the New Jersey Secretary of State as an LLC (limited liability company).   We believe that the sole purpose of forming that LLC was to develop the North End of Ocean Grove. This application, per se, is beyond reproach, but, and this is a big but, were visions of sugar plums dancing in their heads? Were they planning then on zoning changes at the North End? If so, that would be a problem.

Consider this quote: “In January 2007, Wesley Atlantic Village Enterprises (WAVE) and the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association executed a Developers Agreement which set forth the terms by which WAVE and the OGCMA had agreed to proceed with WAVE’s proposal for the development of the site. Among other things, that Developers Agreement provided that WAVE and the OGCMA would serve as Co-redevelopers of the Subject Property.”   This information was with-held from the Planning Board.

The 2007 quote above is from a recent Memorandum of Understanding signed by WAVE and the OGCMA. It clearly shows that those two developers were planning in January 2007 to go ahead with WAVE’s North End Development Plan before the Planning Board ever took its vote and before the Township Committee adopted the NERP on March 24, 2008.

Note that they refer to themselves as “co-redevelopers.” That term can only mean that they were counting on receiving the special designation “area in need of redevelopment.”

On February 28, 2007, the Neptune Township Planning Board passed a resolution (07-12) recommending that the Township designate the North End “an area in need of redevelopment.”

On June 11, 2007, the Neptune Township Committee passed a resolution designating the North End “an area in need of redevelopment,”

On June 9, 2008, the Township Committee designated WAVE and the OGCMA as Co-Redevelopers.

On April 28, 2015, The OGCMA (the owner of Block (1) agreed to transfer control of Block (1) to WAVE by way of a 99 year master lease renewable in perpetuity.

ANALYSIS:

According to the New Jersey Local Redevelopment and Housing Law, in the section defining “Determination of Need for Redevelopment,” there is a statement** (see below) that this special designation be made only if the area ” is not likely to be developed through the instrumentality of private capital. ” **

The timeline above clearly shows that the WAVE and OGCMA partnership had discussed and created plans for the North End development. Clearly they were ready, willing and able to take on that project and they were counting on the special designation.

So why did the Planning Board think that private developers could not do the job? If they had known that those private developers could do the project, they should not have approved the designation, but they did not have that information.

It is our belief that the CMA/WAVE partnership did not want anyone to know of their redevelopment plans in order to obtain the special designation which legally should not have been granted to them under NJ law. **

Unfortunately, there was no effective court challenge to the Planning Board/Township decision, and now the NERP is law under the special designation that they should never have been granted.

Who should have challenged the Township Committee’s Resolution designating the North End “an area in need of redevelopment?” The Home Owners Association, of course, but they were busy cheerleading for the Township Committee, who were “in the tank” with the yet to be named developers.

This history suggests a purposeful distortion of the legislative intent.

The Township Committee should rescind the “Redevelopment designation.” The high density zoning for Block (1) would then automatically revert back to single-family houses. The Committee can do that because there is no signed Re-developers Agreement.

After that, the developer would have the option to prepare site plans for single family homes or they could present their present plan to the Board of Adjustment.

This would correct all the mis-steps of the past, and the entire process would not have to start over again with WAVE’S new proposed plan.

** Determination of need for redevelopment (40A:12A-5). New Jersey Local Redevelopment and Housing Law.

“Land that is owned by the municipality, the county, a local housing authority, redevelopment agency or redevelopment entity, or unimproved vacant land that has remained so for a period of ten years prior to adoption of the resolution, and that by reason of its location, remoteness, lack of means of access to developed sections or portions of the municipality, or topography, or nature of the soil, is not likely to be developed through the instrumentality of private capital.”

Credit:  Jack Bredin, researcher.

KEVIN KLINE   from the film DeLovely

Read Full Post »