416 New Jersey Avenue, Point Pleasant Beach, NJ 08742 • 732-892-1118 • www.pointpleasantbeach.org
Welcome to Point Pleasant Beach

Point Pleasant Beach News

Printable Version

April7, 2010


The April 7, 2010 Special Meeting of the Board of Adjustment opened at 8:16pm. The clerk read the notice of compliance with the "Open public meetings act." Present were Board members: Mr. Wolfersberger, Mr. Spader, Mr. Palisi Chairman Struncius, Mr. Reilly and Mr. Kelly Alternates: Reynolds and Ardito

Applicant - #2010-06 – Richmond Avenue Family LP/Tom Bergstrom – 501 -503 Richmond Avenue & 600 Arnold Avenue – Block 90; Lot 23 – Applicant wishes to reconfigure the existing space on the second floor to reconstruct 5 apartments in fire damaged building.

Steven A. Pardes, attorney for applicant. Tom Bergstrom, applicant, sworn. Applicant explained the reason for the request and explained the upgrades he is making to the building. We be adding a security door to access apartments and proposing an intercom system. Outside of building is almost complete and he has upgraded to cedar impressions as siding and will continue on the lower level. Decals will be removed from the lower level windows. Signage will now comply with the Borough ordinance and the landlord has included in the lease that he also gets to see proposed signage prior to hanging. Applicant stated that the tenant is now going to have hanging wooden signs as displayed in exhibit A -3. Mr. Reilly inquired if the tenant would meet with the town Engineer before installing signs to assure ordinance compliance. Applicant thought that would be an undue hardship on tenant. Mr. Reynolds suggested that they should just condition the signage to allow hanging signs and eliminate decals and affixed window signage. Tom Bergstrom provides his own dumpster in rear of property located in the alley for the tenants and the retail businesses. Chairman Struncius inquired if the floor plan has remained the same? The front of the stores are the same the rear same has slightly been reconfigured. Utilities have been upgraded so the units have individual service. Apartments have been upgraded to included dishwashers and the apartments now have one hour fire rating. Mr. Ardito inquired if the finished building will look like the rendering. (yes)Mr. Ardito stated that the building looks stark and wondered if the applicant was doing anything to dress it up?

Allison Coffin, Professional Planner, stated that this use is suited to the area. The master plan review of 2006 stated that the object of the GC zone is to bring people into the area to live. Apartments and offices are permitted on the second floor, but have been limited to two units over a building and this is five (5) units. It is impossible to provide parking due to the fact the building covers 100% of the property. Special reasons - General welfare is advanced promoting appropriate population density. The smaller scale 2 bedroom units are appropriate for this area. This application is eliminating 2 office spaces which assure appropriate space for the five (5) apartments. Ideal use of this space because there is no detriment to the public; variance would not be an issue except for the apartment house definition. AllisonCoffin’s opinion is there is no significant impact to surrounding area; the only detriment would be the lack of parking.

Mike Palisi stated that this isn’t Hoboken and that most people will have cars. Allison Coffin stated that the tenants will use the public parking lot located across the street. As a Planner she believes that having this use spreads the parking out instead of having the commercial demand all day. Mr. Wolfersberger inquired about the tenants taking up the street parking and was informed that those parking spaces have a one hour limit. Allison Coffin stated that these apartments are more suited for couples than families due to the fact that that they are located on a highway without any available recreation in the immediate area for children. Tom Bergstrom said that he has never had tenants with children and that the apartments are now more expensive because they have washer/dryers and dishwashers.

No audience Questions


Mr. Spader – Questioned about the units being condominiums. Dennis Galvin stated that condo ownership is not handled through the municipality.

Mr. Kelly – Appreciates how quickly the property is being renovated and the job being done. Likes the idea that the landlord has taken a personal interest in the signage; in favor of the apartments over offices. In favor of application

Mr. Wolfersberger – Has been upstairs in the offices and they were in need of being upgraded. His concern for parking has been alleviated; does not believe there is a negative impact and believes the signage issue has been addressed. Inclined to vote in favor

Mr. Reilly – Agrees with Mr. Wolfersberger and thinks the applicant has done a beautiful job renovating the exterior of building. In summary is in favor of the application.

Chairman Struncius - In a number of instances the Master Plan review refers to the GC area and the importance of residential in the downtown area and this application is following the recommendations presented. In favor

Mr. Spader – Agrees and believes this is following the thought of the Master Plan. Also in favor


1. Building will be built according to the architectural submitted.
2. Apartments to be accessed through intercom system.

Motion by Mr. Reilly, second by Mr. Palisi to approve application #2010-06 with conditions.

In favor: Mr. Wolfersberger, Mr. Spader, Mr. Palisi Chairman Struncius, Mr. Reilly, Mr. Kelly and Mr. Reynolds

Letter from Lee Childers (Gilligan Engineering) to amend resolution to allow the property known as PLRJ to pave the parking lot in place of pavers.

The Board concluded that they would like Lee Childers to appear personally before the board to explain why the need for the change.

Inlet Point Condos (Landscape approval) – Chris Dougherty, architect explained the submitted landscape plan. Fence and gate will be removed from the plan. A/c units will be 2 feet off the ground to meet flood requirements. The Board determined that the plan was not clear on the details and wants another submission and will be discussed and memorialized at the next meeting.

Meeting adjourned at 10:02om

Attest: Karen L. Mills, Clerk of the Board

Published May07, 2010 | Board of Adjustment Minutes | 1018

Municipal Forms Download for Android Download for Iphone
Download for Iphones
Download for Android

Add/Remove/Update Your Contact Information
SwiftReach Networks, Inc.

Municipal Forms

Power Outage

Hurricane Sandy Information