News
Contrary To County Statement, Sea Bright Never Agreed To Bridge Option, Mayor Says
By Ryan Fennell
SEA BRIGHT - The Borough of Sea Bright held their fifth and final Smart Growth meeting of 2008 on Thursday to discuss the progress of the new lifeguard station and beach project as well as the initial plans to renovate the Borough Hall to conform to mandates set forth by Superior Court Judge Lawrence M. Lawson. However, an addendum to the agenda proved to be the highlight of the evening.
Several years ago Monmouth County engineers presented the borough with a study that examined the options available to Rumson and Sea Bright regarding the bridge that connects the two municipalities commonly referred to as the Rumson/ Sea Bright bridge.
Sea Bright Mayor Maria Fernandes learned of a recent meeting held by county officials to discuss the future of the bridge and requested a copy of the presentation.
Borough officials and residents alike believed they were about to see updated data and proposals for the first time.
As it turned out, the presentation was the same as the one that was presented by the county several years ago but was dated September 8, 2008.
The proposal outlines five options available to the two municipalities.
Obvious to everyone was that on the first slide regarding traffic patterns and density the data being used was from 1999.
The presentation also went as far as to claim that officials from Rumson and Sea Bright had agreed that a particular option, had been agreed upon as the best option to pursue.
No one on the council could recollect ever agreeing to any particular option and pointed out that the feeling at the time of the initial presentation was that none of the proposed options were appealing.
"We didn't agree to anything," Fernandes said.
"My recollection is that the county never asked Rumson which design we favored so this also comes as a surprise to me," Rumson Mayor John Ekdahl said. "We never signed off on anything."
The option in question would require property acquisition to the south of the existing bridge through eminent domain in order to build a new bridge while the existing bridge would remain in use throughout construction.
This proposal would severely impact the Getty gas station and the attached Dunkin Donuts that currently occupy that location.
The owners of the businesses as well as the property owner were in attendance for the presentation.
Fernandes is urging the businesses and residents to write the borough council and to the county expressing their concerns with the project as well as any commentary they may be willing to provide.
Fernandes said that she would like to see the council get involved in the early stages of this project to avoid any adverse affects of a decision by the county without sufficient input from Sea Bright's officials and residents.
"It is very important to share our concerns and recommendations while this is in its early stages," Fernandes said.
Due to the Highlands Bridge project the Rumson/ Sea Bright Bridge proposal is still ten years away from being implemented.
The consensus of the council at Thursday's meeting was that they would prefer the bridge be repaired rather than reconstructed as proposed by the county.
As for the Borough Hall, the council has agreed that renovating the existing building is its most viable option and hopes to have architectural plans available at the first Smart Growth meeting of 2009.
Renovating the existing building means opening up the recreational room that divides the municipal courtroom and the Borough Hall offices at the front of the building.
According to Councilman Brian Kelly, the existing recreation room would no longer function as a recreational facility under this proposal.
The Mayor and Council will be sending a letter to Judge Lawson informing him of their intentions.
Lawson set a deadline of December 31, 2008 for Sea Bright to come up with "firm plans" for complying with state statutes regarding their municipal court facilities.
Currently the court offices are housed in a trailer behind Borough Hall and have been non-compliant with state statutes for approximately 15 years.
If the borough had not come up with plans to remedy the situation by the December 31 deadline, the borough would be vulnerable to a seizure of court revenues by the Superior Court for an indefinite period of time.
The Mayor and Council are hoping that the letter informing Lawson of their decision to renovate will be sufficient.
Architectural plans will also explore the possibility of expanding the building to the rear but would likely require Coastal Area Facility Review Act (CAFRA) permits because the buildings footprint would be expanding closer to the ocean.
