CAPE MAY POINT — Borough Commission tabled a measure that would have amended trash storage regulations after concerned residents questioned the reasoning and suggested the borough enforce the existing ordinance rather than change it.
Borough code requires trash and recyclable storage be located in the side or rear yard of a property, screened from public view on the street. Solicitor John Amenhauser said June 23 that there was an issue making a particular section of the code fit squarely with trash location for corner properties because they front on two streets.
The code states that for corner lots, storage must be in a yard area that does not front on a street and is screened from public view.
The revised language for corner lots would require storage in a yard screened from public view and not visible from the street, removing the section about fronting on a street.
The intent of the ordinance was to eliminate trash corrals. On July 28, Resident Jon Oblinger asked if that intent remained the same.
“The only real words changing in the proposed ordinance are to delete the requirement that storage not front on the street,” he said. “Why? If not to encourage, at least allow corner properties to do that?”
Mayor Anita VanHeeswyk said there are a few properties in the borough that are built right on the lot line, with side yards too small to get trash around.
Amenhauser added that there are properties where every part of the yard can be viewed from the street and there’s no ability to screen trash on those properties. Deputy Mayor Elise Geiger said that those properties are very rare.
“In the event that they are rare, why don’t we deal with those individually and allow code enforcement to deal with those rather than opening up the ability [for] every corner property in the Borough of Cape May Point to move their trash out to the front of the street?” Oblinger asked.
Amenhauser said it could be dealt with individually.
“You’re going to have somebody that’s not happy about it and then it opens up a can of worms,” Amenhauser said.
Ellen Myer said she agreed with Oblinger and that the existing code should be enforced and not changed.
“We’re talking about trash; no one wants to deal with trash; they don’t want to deal with their own and you don’t want to deal with your neighbor’s trash,” Myer said. “If there are these select few corner properties that would be allowed to store their trash in the front yards, would the board agree it would be unreasonable my trash to be closer to my neighbor’s home than my own home?”
Amenhauser said the commissioners did not have to answer hypothetical questions that did not deal with the language of the proposed ordinance. He added that he wanted to be clear that members of the community seemed to be talking about one property, but the ordinance was related to any property that fits the definition within the borough.
“On top of it, the commissioners aren’t responding because I recommended that they not respond,” Amenhauser said. “I explained exactly why that was: it was because one of the commenters has sent correspondence to the borough, putting them on notice of potential litigation.”
Amenhauser recommended the commissioners not speak and he hoped that was not held negatively against them.
“I think the proposed new code just gives a pass to the corner lots to store their trash at the street,” Myer said. “Even if it’s still completely doable and practical to store it in their side or rear yard.”
Myer said she lives on a corner property and has neighbors who have been storing their trash at the front of the property.
“Side and rear yards are defined in zoning and people are kind of making assumptions about this on a corner lot; it’s different from a standard lot,” VanHeeswyk said, adding that side yards are very small.
Resident Touhey Myer asked if in the case of corner lots that front on two or more streets, compliance with the requirement to store trash receptacles in the side or rear yard on every corner property would be considered impractical.
“You can read it that way,” Amenhauser said. “I’ll give you an example: you’re looking at a corner property, standing in front of it. When I’m looking at it, it’s visible from all streets; both sides of it are visible from that street to the other corner. It’s visible from the street on both corners, therefore impossible to shield something from street view at any point, any location on that corner property.”
Touhey Myer asked if the commissioners agreed that every corner lot by definition is impractical. Several additional questions went unanswered.
Amenhauser added that since the borough had been put on notice of opposition to the ordinance, he recommended being careful with any response.
“I want to echo what Touhey and Ellen said, and we’re on a corner property too; we don’t want neighbors and renters’ trash closer to our house than their house,” resident Mary Beth McCarry said. “Can it just be closer to their existing property? Isn’t that common courtesy and decency regardless of the corral or whatever? I don’t understand why that’s controversial.”
Resident John McCarry noted that he lives across from the Myers and he asked how people would feel if a neighbor’s trash were placed against their home.
“We’re here to have fun, build relationships and care for each other,” John McCarry said. “This is a perfect example of where that is not taking place. This was supposed to be a spiritual retreat community, that completely goes against that.”
He added that it was one thing to deal with the smell and rotting garbage, but another was the resulting infestation of rodents.
“I think we have to pause and reflect on their situation and care about their situation because they’re a member of our community,” he said, adding that it has to be important enough to stop and rethink this decision.
The ordinance was tabled in a 2-1 vote, with Geiger being the lone dissenter.
By RACHEL SHUBIN/Special to the Star and Wave
