.
Feedback

District 4 Parking Plan Passed by Point Beach Council

Mayor says plan might be expanded into District 3

Parking on residential streets in District 4 will soon be off limits during the summer overnight hours except for taxpayers, now that a new parking plan has been narrowly passed by Point Beach Council at Tuesday night's meeting at

The plan does not allow parking on residential streets in District 4 from midnight to 6 a.m. except for taxpayers, or those they share with, who have parking placards from the town, from the Monday before Memorial Day to the Monday after Labor Day, said Councilman Michael Corbally, who had initially proposed the plan.

District 4's boundaries are the ocean on the east, the New Jersey Transit Railroad Tracks on the west, the Manasquan River and Inlet on the north and the north side of Arnold Avenue on the south.

Councilmembers William Mayer, Tim Lurie and Stephen Reid voted against adopting the parking plan ordinance on second reading. Councilmembers Kristine Tooker, Corbally, Bret Gordon and Mayor Vincent Barrella voted for it.

Barrella only votes when there is a tie.

Barrella said the parking ordinance is to help prevent a repeat of last summer when drunks were strolling through residential neighborhoods early in the morning, frequently being loud and unruly and urinating and vomiting on people's lawns.

Police have said that weekends last summer were the worst in the past 17 years in terms of criminal mischief, disorderly conduct and petty crime.

During a meeting that went on for a few hours, the council voted 4 to 3 for the parking plan, which calls for each taxpayer to receive five transferable parking placards.

The placards can be shared with tenants or visitors.

If lost, taxpayers can ask Municipal Business Administrator Christine Riehl for a new one, said Corbally after the meeting.

"We'll work it out," said Corbally.

Mayor Vincent Barrella said after the meeting that he may ask the council to pass a measure to help prevent a parking problem from seeping into District 3, which was a concern raised by some residents who spoke during the meeting.

"If there are problems with the first few streets in District 3, I'd like the ability to adjust and adapt," Barrella said.

The measure was one of two opposed by some local businesses. Representatives of Jenkinson's and Martell's said after the meeting they did not have an immediate comment regarding the parking plan or the ordinances that were passed Tuesday night.

Mayer and Reid said the parking problem should be addressed through greater police enforcement which they feel will be possible this summer since at least 40 new special officers are being added to the local police ranks.

Mayer also said that in for a townwide plan, voters in the first three districts voted no.

He said, "If you asked District 3 voters if they wanted a parking plan in District 4 only, they wouldn't have said no, they would have said 'Hell, no.'  I think it will hurt tourism. You deal with this through enforcement. You put a cop on every corner, have zero tolerance, keep giving out tickets until word gets out that this will not be tolerated."

Mayer and Gordon have recently been having private negotiation sessions with Jenkinson's and Martell's representatives to try to come up with mutually-agreeable ways for the businesses to continue operating at a level acceptable to owners along with helping the town pay for police services and helping to cut down on loud, rowdy behavior by some in residential neighborhoods this summer.

When asked after the meeting if the negotiations yielded any useful results, Mayer said, "An offer was made, but I don't think that's going to happen now."

He said boardwalk business owners had offered a substantial sum of money, to be paid on an annual basis, to help address the town's financial needs to support police and other services.

Mayer would not say what the amount is because it was offered in private negotiations.

"The negotiations assumed that these two ordinances would not pass," he said, referring to the ordinances regarding earlier bar closings and the District 4 parking plan.

He also cited a letter written by a Jenkinson's attorney (see attachment) saying there will be no more negotiations as long as the town is considering the two ordinances.

"I think the negotiations are over and I don't think that offer of a payment still stands after the votes tonight," he said.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Point Pleasant Patch? Find your Local Patch »

A Resident April 30, 2012 at 01:15 am
Cathy Kelly,
Don't let your obvious hatred of Sean interfere with your dealings with his father. Though they are father and son...they have both had very different political "lives".
Cathy Kelly April 30, 2012 at 01:34 am
Resident,
Hate is a very strong word. I have a major issue with people that distort the truth and contradict themselves. I do apologize for all of the times that people interpret what I say as being nasty,I just feel if you are not going to tell the truth than you should not post anything.....
Amy A. April 30, 2012 at 05:51 pm
Ms. Kelly, as Buddha said "In a controversy, the instant we feel anger, we have already ceased striving for the truth, and have begun striving for ourselves."
blindbert April 30, 2012 at 10:38 pm
I find it most interesting that many complain about the sqeaky wheel district four requiring extra services and or expenditures.
I would like to see what would happen if they changed Clarks Landing to a bar in the same vain as Martells or Jenkinsons. After all it was the original resort area in our community, Clarks would have a simillar arguement that many of the BW supporters put forth. I wonder what voting district contributes the most tax revenue, I would have to guess the fourth based on the fact that it by far and away has the most homes and a lot of business properties. I wonder what district sends the least amount of children to the school system which is by far and away the largest single expense this town deals with. Once again it is probably the fourth. So get off this sqeaky wheel rap because it is the fourth district that provides the largest tax bases that pay for the other districts little darlings education. Once I was blind and now I can see!
Beach_N8iv May 1, 2012 at 02:57 am
Wait until the next election, THEN you'll see how we feel about you squeakers and your personal politicians. Hopefully we can find qualified people who understand that there is a town WEST of the tracks. Oh, BTW, Clark's is in the Boro. I would think that District 1 has the fewest students but I don't know that for sure.
Spooner May 1, 2012 at 03:24 am
...and the Boro Mayor lives there. . . whose embroiled in a zoning dispute with the owners over similar issues?
Cathy Kelly May 1, 2012 at 04:03 am
Beach, I am not sure, what it is you want. I see your comments and please correct me if I’m wrong. You seem to be very frustrated that the council is ignoring what happens in your district as opposed to district 4. I can understand your frustration if you have been upset with the lack of action taken by the council to address your concerns…. What I don’t understand is the animosity towards the residents that live in district 4. You said in one comment: “It would be nice if District 4 would just secede from the town so that the rest of us won't have to pay for the grease for this squeaky wheel. After all, you already have most of the politicians there” You do realize that the revenue that the town gets comes from parking and violations(people breaking the law) in district 4…It is quite opposite of what you are saying…..Do you honestly think that I(living in district 4)want people breaking the law to bring in revenue. The other districts are not as you say “paying for the grease of this squeaky wheel” We are paying for you!!.. The violations that are being written are bringing IN revenue at the expense of the residents and families that have to deal with the garbage,urination,defacation,lewdness,garbage etc...Some have small children and they are at least 3 blocks up.So you are angry with the people that are living over here,dealing with everything,paying taxes and just trying to raise a family?
Mike Corbally May 1, 2012 at 04:19 am
Everyone admits the problem exists. We are trying to put some solutions in place for this summer. Its time to take action.
JohnnyT May 1, 2012 at 06:22 am
The fact of the matter is we need the revenue from tickets and violations of the law to survive as a town if we have to pay for all the police. Obviously the amount is never enough and each year more is needed because of all the raises, health insurance increases and pension obligations that get bigger each year for both the police and town workers. So, yes the police and the residents are hoping for people to break the law otherwise the police will lose their jobs and the residents are stuck paying for it all.
Beach_N8iv May 1, 2012 at 06:27 am
Maybe secession could be the answer. You have (in your own words) "all the "people breaking the law" in D4. We have NO parking or code enforcement here so we wouldn't have to pay for that and, since YOU have all the lawbreakers we wouldn't need more than a few cops to run radar on the highway and do other police duties. As I stated earlier, maybe it's time to get Trenton involved.
Been here before May 1, 2012 at 11:55 am
Nonsense Councilman. 200 of the residents in District 4 voted against the Parking plan, but you don't care about them. You really are the worst of politicians, inventing problems you don't have the foggiest idea how to address. This notion you champion that "we must do something" to prevent bad things from happening in this summer is an excuse for arrogant politicians to attempt solutions whose consequences they can never fully understand. These ordinances are a perfect example. Stupid politicians, starting with Barrella and followed by Hennessy and Dyer, cut the cops, then cops got discouraged cause not enough cops, so lax enforcement and a nice problem for Barrella to exaggerate for political purposes and the police to exploit for better funding. Enforcement, not these ordinances, is the right answer. Always has been the answer, always will be the answer.
PPB evolved into the wonderful place it was and is----not because of what politicians did, but despite what politicians did---as Thomas Paine wrote "Those that govern less, govern best." This philosophy is what made the GB before 2008 such a huge success-----today's group just doesn't have the patience to let the solutions evolve---they arrogantly think they know better-----sure way to ruin the town
blindbert May 1, 2012 at 12:08 pm
Beach,
If as you put forth that D$ secede the financial advantage would be D4's gain and loss to the other three. What would we call the new town?? "Cook's Homestead" ?," Lake Louise"? , "The 4th of July"???? I have heard it said that one can not win election in town without winning the 4th! Even with all the summer homes they still have the largest number of voters. Certain forces in town love D4 taxes , But not their vote!
A Resident May 1, 2012 at 12:35 pm
"I wonder what district sends the least amount of children to the school system which is by far and away the largest single expense this town deals with. Once again it is probably the fourth."
I'd bet on the library district... There's an awful lot of families with kids living around the Antrim in D4
A Resident May 1, 2012 at 12:40 pm
"and families that have to deal with the garbage,urination,defacation,lewdness,garbage etc"
40+ years ago, when I lived in the area of the boardwalk....this occurred. It's still occurring. What has changed in those 40+ years? Yup....the people that moved into the area believing this stuff never happened.
A Resident May 1, 2012 at 12:42 pm
But the D4 town would have to close down from Sep to May as it's a ghost town then...
Parking and violations get enforced in the other 3 districts year round, not just a 4 month span.
Cathy Kelly May 1, 2012 at 12:49 pm
Resident,again I am not sure why the residents are being blamed for wanting to correct a problem. The BW even acknowledges that it is getting worse. I never said it didn't happen 40 years ago. I didn't notice it getting really bad until the last 2 years. I don't understand why people just want to argue. If there were problems in the other districts,I would not just say,the residents over there should just deal with it,I would say the problem should be fixed....
Beach_N8iv May 1, 2012 at 01:04 pm
Oh really, Resident? I have been here for ALMOST 60 years and I haven't seen it. I can show you examples to prove my point. Can you?
A Resident May 1, 2012 at 03:54 pm
Cuz your not fixing the problem. You are moving it, you are pushing it other places, you are changing the times that it will happen.
If you think peoples bad behavior is simply going to change due to an earlier closing time and having to move their car just before midnight....you are going to be very unhappy. People that are behaving that way are still going to behave that way. It will just be earlier in the night. Nothing in these ordinances will change their behavior....just when. Are you that naive to think no one gets drunk and such before midnight? Are you that naive to think people won't be walking back to their cars at 11:59pm and still throwing out their garbage, getting sick, and "relieving" themselves? Honestly?
Beach_N8iv May 1, 2012 at 04:11 pm
Here's a thought. Can the town be held liable (contributory or gross negligence) for any drunk driving accidents since they are not just encouraging drunk driving but REQUIRING it.
blindbert May 1, 2012 at 05:00 pm
Back in the 70's the only bar that D4 problems were stemming from was the Riptide.
At that time the town restricted "The Riptide" and "The Beach (Hoffman) House". That Riptide crowd was a lot smaller than the current 2 large boardwalk bars. I was amazed that the capacity of those two Bars is well over 3 thousand people. How many were allowed back then?? 3,000 is more than voter turnout!! Both those bars have greatly expanded the size of the operations. Who turned a blind eye as these continued expansions. Most towns require addressing parking concerns when changing use or expanding. Look at the old photos of those operation and compare to now . I think food/ drink were not allowed in the rocker area . That area was probably a quarter of the entire footprint. Did Martells have bar on the beach? The usable floor areas seems to keep increasing and spliling out to onto the beach with patios and decks. Increased volume = requisite demand for parking. Those bar patrons are forced to parking further away.. Sure there was some rowdy behavior back in the day. It is just that the volume of that behavior has increased so drastically, The season was over at labor day and now it has extended shoulder seasons for longer periods in the spring and fall. That means that they are walking farther and past more homes in their inebriated state. Do those business' really not allow or turn away parking from thier lots??? "There was a time when I went Blind"
A Resident May 1, 2012 at 07:07 pm
"those two Bars is well over 3 thousand people. How many were allowed back then??
" - less, cuz the buildings were smaller. "Who turned a blind eye as these continued expansions. Most towns require addressing parking concerns when changing use or expanding. " No one turned a blind eye. All legal expansions that were processed through the building department....just public not paying attention. Parking amounts are spelled out in legal building codes. "The season was over at labor day and now it has extended shoulder seasons for longer periods in the spring and fall. " - something that the Town was looking to have happen not that long ago....Seafood festival is a good example.... "Do those business' really not allow or turn away parking from thier lots???" - No.
Judy May 30, 2012 at 11:13 pm
What about the homeowner who wants to have a party? Do all his guests have to leave at 12:00 now? Not everyone parking on the street is a patron from the boardwalk?
Mike Corbally May 31, 2012 at 12:17 am
No Judy, party all night as long as you don't disrupt your neighbor after 10PM.
Bobby K June 12, 2012 at 04:34 am
I see comments about quality of life Mine has already been diminished since I came home today to an ugly parking sign on my front lawn and most likely damaged my sprinklers system which luckily I am turning on late this year ie this week With 30 or 40 permits issued for a short dead end street with six houses ( one is mutli family so not sure how many they get ) this will do absolutely nothing to help the parking situation but has already had a negative impact on my quality of life
Hope4U July 1, 2012 at 10:30 pm
I visited the "lovely" town of PPB and left with a ticket. I never plan on spendIng my money in a town that does not give it's patrons and visitors warnings about a new parking ordinance. Shame on you PPB for taking advantage of the people that make your town flourish. It's a pity too because my son loved going to the boardwalk on mothers day.
My issuing ticket was given at 12:01am. It disgusted me that they are taking advantage of people and "stealing" their money by issuing tickets.
Beach_N8iv July 2, 2012 at 03:23 am
There's a sign about every 15 feet or so. What more do you want? I do NOT agree with or like the parking scam but if you didn't read the well posted regulations and blame the town, well maybe, just maybe you SHOULD go somewhere else. Keansburg, for example.
hippocratic oath July 2, 2012 at 03:58 am
Beach_N8iv: You're so totally WRONG! The parking permit signs are absolutely NOT posted every 15 feet. Try about every 90 feet or so. On every block in D4 -- there's 2 signs on each block -- basically one on each end of the block. That hardly indicates regulations that are "well posted" as you describe. Even the Chief advised against this inadequate posting of signage -- but the GB once again did NOT listen to their professionals -- like they professed they would during campaign season.
Hope4U: You're right -- it is disgusting. No worries though. The parking plan will be ruled illegal in about 2 weeks when it goes to Superior Court. Then the town will have to refund the money to everyone who was given tickets. I'd suggest you appeal your ticket to the Municipal judge. By the time you get a court date, you're ticket will be deemed invalid anyway -- so you WIN!
Spooner July 2, 2012 at 04:24 am
Hope4U- please if you can contact the Ocean Star at 732-899-7606 or email info@theoceanstar.com, I think they would be very interested in publishing the copy of the ticket and your commentary in demanding a public apology from the Government of Point Pleasant Beach. . .that's outrageous!
Beach_N8iv July 2, 2012 at 06:03 am
Every 90 feet? OK, I'll go take a look. Still, the signs are there, read them. As I said, I don't agree with this law, I voted against it when it was on the "pay no mind to the voters" ballot and I oppose it now. I hope that it DOES get thrown out in court. Until that happens people have a choice, obey the law or fight the ticket. If you don't want to follow the law . . . GO SOMEWHERE ELSE! SPOONER: A public apology? For enforcing the law? How about no, does no work for you?
annoyed July 2, 2012 at 02:20 pm
Does anyone know how much the ticket is? I received a court date for September and no one can tell me the amount of the ticket. I wasn't at the bar or drinking at all; I simply walked the boardwalk/beach until around 12:30 and got hit with this ticket. Unbelievable.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Bowie Thelonius June 19, 2013 at 09:27 am
I doubt it. People love to complain :) Myself included I suppose.
Happy Point Beacher June 19, 2013 at 01:37 pm
Too bad. I don't complain where it will do no good. I do complain when it can change things for theRead More better. Don't waste your time or be negative.