Amherst Ave residents in Margate are asking to share the following information in regards to development along the bayfront.
The Margate Homeowners Association is also recommending that residents attend the THURSDAY DEC 20 commissioner meeting.
Statement from Amherst residents in Margate is as follows:
On December 20, Commissioners are expected to adopt an ordinance that gives a private developer 7 parking spaces along the bay area restaurant district. The city is saying they are giving them the spaces in return for replacing the bulkhead. The facts are:
The developer wants to build a 5,800 square foot building over the top of the 7 parking spaces. Integrity Marina (the prior building) was only 2,300 square feet and sat entirely on the water.
The developer would have to replace the bulkhead anyway if he wanted to develop the property per his NJDEP permit.
The City of Margate contends that the land has no public use, while the area residents contend that they are public parking spaces.
The project requires 34 spaces and the developer has 0 spaces without the 7 spaces still way short of the requirement.
The City of Margate is not getting market value for the spaces based on other deals in the bay area.
There is a shortage of public parking spaces in this bay area restaurant district. During the summer, many cars park illegally due to lack of parking in the area. This is an existing safety concern which will be exacerbated by this and the restaurant project next door.
The City of Margate already approved the restaurant project next door which needs 60 spaces, but only has 4 spaces. This is being challenged by area residents and Sofia’s Restaurant.
Resident safety issues such as parking too close to the crosswalk and intersection, are not being addressed. Bicyclists and runners along Amherst Ave will be impacted by both projects.
As a reminder, the parking spots are for the benefit of all, not a select few, and should not be given away.
This will greatly impact residents of the Bay Area, not for the better. It is congested enough. If private residences need to provide parking per amount of bedrooms, why shouldn’t businesses have to adhere to similar standards
I so agree….all other businesses have to adhere to specific rules regarding parking requirements….there is NO parking available already…why is this being allowed…
Developers, as myself and others, have been TURNED down to put condos on second floor of buildings because there wasn’t ENOUGH parking even if you have more than enough…but this project has NOTHING from the beginning and now the city wants to give them a FEW spaces which should not be allowed PLUS they still don’t meet the requirements that the rest of us do.
AS WILLISTON WOULD OPINE: PAST CONSIDERATION ( BULKHEAD) is NO CONSIDERATION !!!
WHO ELSE?……………………. SEWELL 22 WEST DRIVE (609) 822-6868
NORMASEWELL@JUNO.COM
I can’t beleive our Commisioners think this property has no public value. How about being able to see the bay? This is Margate’s biggest weakness as a Shore town….so little access to our bay. This project should not be approved, but at the very least, let’s reconsider its size and parking needs.
These projects will replace the old crumbling businesses. Parking demand will be less than it was back in the day as any local would know.
Shoobies buy residences in commercial area than want to remove businesses to increase the value of their homes.
If they wanted to live in a quieter neighborhood, they should have paid what that would have cost. It’s pathetic.
Gee, what a surprise that Mark Gallagher thinks this is a great idea. Bayview obstruction. Less parking for people going to restaurants.
Win-win for you maybe, not the residents of Margate who have to abide by restrictive ridiculous parking restrictions.
Even as I write this I know it’s a waste of time because it’s a done deal. And I paid PLENTY $$$$$ for my home which is near the bay.
Seems as if you are confused as to whose view it is. Your living rooms used to sit on top of packed taverns etc whose parking demand was higher than that for these projects. You probably don’t remember that. These new projects funded privately and with full backing of the duly elected city administration will revitalize the Bayfront for all citizens.
The new promenade will provide safe access for pedestrians along the bulkhead from Juniors to Lambertis. Your selfish opposition hurts the rest of the citizenry and costs the taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars in lost tax receipts and legal fees.
In a nutshell you folks want a view you didn’t pay for and you don’t want others to compete with your businesses. Hiding your identity doesn’t mean us locals don’t know whose behind this shameful opposition.
Who is behind this as you wrote in your comment?
Have the guts to respond with your name to Mark if you think you’re so special
Agreed, Mark. This all about them and their view. I ask what about the people they blocked with their 2.75 story monstrosities.
Screw them, build it!
Don’t move into a business corridor and complain about the business going on their.
Where the 2.75 story monstrosities given zoning exemptions ? Or were they built following the zoning laws ?
Thank you thats correct position
I have been reading about the proposed water park to be floated near the marinas located on Amherst Avenue. These amusements are entertaining however there is a very significant safety issue associated with swimming in salt water near boats and docks which hasn’t been addressed. A vast reference of articles have been published describing the potential for electrocution from unknown and unavoidable current leakage. Multiple deaths have been reported and present recommendation is to prohibit all swimming in areas near marinas.
In order to prevent possible deaths in our community as well as to avoid municipal liability I recommend that these issues be addressed.
References:
Swimming Near Boat Docks Claim More Lives
BoatU.S. June 20, 2017
Be Safe and NEVER Swim at a Marina
The Carefree Boater July 18, 2015
Swimming Hazards in Marinas-
Robson Forensic March 9, 2017
https://www.boatus.com/pressroom/release.asp?id=1308
It is obvious from comments and actions of the current administration and especially the Zoning Committee that they are hellbent on changing Margate from “A residential city by the sea”, to one that is MUCH more welcoming to commercialism. Witness the Miniature Golf Course, the ongoing Ventura saga, and now Amhearst Ave.
The majority of taxpayers are non-residents, therefore, under current law don’t get a vote…and I believe are tolerated, but ignored. If residents wish to keep Margate a residential community, and are not pleased with what seems to be the current trend- let them continue to speak out, and BE HEARD AT THE BALLOT BOX!
You obviously know little of the history of this highly commercial section of Margate.On a daily basis the marinas that are being replaced had hundreds of patrons for party boats, fishing charters and boat rentals etc. Nightly there were live bands at Gables, The Old Tavern, and Merrills, plus Kellys Pub, Maynards, The Beacon, Moylans, Strotbecks, The Edgewater, The Elbow Room etc. serving thousands of patrons every night all summer long.There is no comparison today to the massive vehicle and pedestrian traffic from that time.
Most people walked back then.
Really??? I blow up your nonsensical premise and you go with they walked??
Bull####.
Zoning laws in place today are much differant from zoning laws in place during Barbary Coast days .
If you are going to put zoning rules on the books then be prepared to follow them and enforce them, if these zoning laws are too stringent for development then change the laws ,
Enforcing them selectively is just plain wrong
Margate like many towns has changed over the years. The residential lifestyle has attracted many prople seeking summer homes to buy , build and now luve full time in Margate.
Many years ago I frequented all the bars and clubs by the bay. Many were for lack if a better term shit holes in disrepair.
That all changed as the demographics changed.
Those who paid good hard earned money to enjoy the residential lifestyle want to keep what Margate sold them. They have concerns that have nothing to di with what was. They are concerned with what they enjoy and this new direction will have a negative effect on their lifestyles and perhaps property values.i understand their concerns.
Along with the parking issues, the out of control speeding on Amherst Ave is a significant safety risk and it falls on deaf ears. Maybe when someone is killed by a driver doing 50+ MPH in a 25 MPH residential street something will be done. Wake up folks before it’s too late!
Wait is it too busy and packed with cars or is it so open someone can go 50 mph? Just whining to whine. Take a hike.
Yes, the amount of traffic, speeding and deisregard for people on Amherst Avenue is getting worse every year. I and my family sit on our deck and watch this unfold. Friday night is unbelievable. Cars come speeding through to get to a Longport. There is never no police presence. We have to call the police very often for illegal parking. The same thing will result with these new buildings. Too many people in the Summer to be handled properly and safely. There should be a speed bump and blinking red light near Cookies and Lamberi’s. It is totally unbelievable on one has been seriously injured or killed. It is just a matter of time. But why? AMHERST AVE RESIDENT.
The bay needs to be dredged before any kind of a waterpark could be put in it , we already have flooding here all the time. I have lost a car and work days due to this. There are also not enough parking spots now .
who would want to swim around in the bay water next to all those boats ??? Can that be healthy if kids have cuts or they swallow some of that water ?? I would never let me kids play in a bay water park near all the boats … disgusting …
…me thinks, perhaps Mr. Gallagher, owner of a small construction company, may have an agenda.
I blow up your entire premise and you deflect with childish nonsense while hiding your identity. Man up and make your case.
My agenda is to build a beautiful new building for a local client investing millions of dollars to provide a fabulous project for all to enjoy.. This will replace a dilapidated eyesore that was an embarrassment to the city. It was for sale for years and he was the only one to step up to help kick start the revitalization of the Bayfront area.
Keep up the fight, Mark. The NIMBY in Margate is strong, but they all bought in a commercial area knowing it was a commercial area now they want it to be a retirement community.
Ah Ha!!
So it was always about the $$$$’s Mark, and I thought you were just an obsessed citizen. I remember the days of Maloneys, The White House, Barbery Coast, etc. The point is most Margate residents want this to be a residential city.
Maybe you should attempt to compete with the builders who seem to have captured the residential market. This rant does little for your professional image.
Not entirely true , when I first looked into purchasing the property I was told by Margate that all existing current zoning issues would need to be followed . Had I known a magic wand could be waved and existing zoning laws could be ignored with City Blessings I would have continued with the purchase. it’s interesting how zoning laws get applied in Margate recently .
WRONG !!!!!!! He Was not the only buyer , He was the only buyer that got a zoning exemption promise PRIOR to purchase ,
Still hiding out are you?? Why are you afraid to make your case and put your name to it?You are clueless.My image?? Really???No need to worry about me as I’m doing just fine. The city is 100% in favor of revitalizing the Bayfront. Only part timers like you want to remake commercial district into Mayberry.
I grew up in Ventnor, live in Margate.
Relatives work for the municipality.
“Clueless versus Unglued”
Clueless with no courage. Afraid to man up and stand behind your mindless posts.I believe I’m done wasting anymore time with the likes of you.
Bye bye Mark
I’ve just moved to Margate Marina District and I am trying to understand both positions on this topic, dare I say issue. Prior to the tear town, I think we can all agree these deteriorating buildings were not adding any value to the community. So, thank you for taking them down. Replacing the structures with another restaurant makes sense and as does adding shops, unless you’re a competitor restaurant or you bought a house with a water view across the street. What doesn’t make sense is using this great land parcel to park a car. If that’s the that issue, I respectfully ask why Margare doesn’t operate a shuttle to this location and create adequate parking on location that no one visits?
Another point to consider as I await replies on this matter…..
Can we articulate our views without a personal insults or other “Bully” tactics? Both “Anonymous” and “Mr. Gallagher have valid points on their opposing views but the point is lost when it becomes a vicious personal attack. Please continue to make them —it’s important to hear both sides of a topic—but in any bebste, the one who hits under the belt essentially loses the fight. As a community, we should support open discussion and DISREGARD verbal attacks that threaten this adherent right.
Please—let’s be constructive with providing opinions and historical facts and let then let’s respect the majority vote.