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


June 21, 2012

Minutes

The June 21, 2012 Regular meeting of the Board of Adjustment opened at 7:30pm. The clerk read the notice of compliance with the "Open public meetings act." Present were Board members: Wolfersberger, Spader, Reilly, Struncius. Kelly, Reynolds and Renner
Absent: Ardito and Loder
Motion by Mr. Kelly, second by Mr. Spader to memorialize the May 17, 2012 BOA minutes
In favor: Spader, Kelly, Reynolds and Renner
Opposed: None
Motion by Mr. Spader, second Kelly to memorialize the June 7, 2012 BOA minutes
In favor: Wolfersberger, Spader, Reilly, Kelly and Renner
Opposed: None

Motion by Mr. Kelly, second by Mr. Spader to memorialize the action and vote approving application # 2011-21 of Maria and Nacimento Ruela with conditions
In favor: Spader, Kelly, Reynolds Reilly and Renner
Opposed: None

Motion by Mr. Reynolds, second by Mr. Spader to memorialize the action and vote approving application #2012-10 of Franco Fallone with conditions.
In favor: Spader, Kelly, Reynolds, Reilly and Renner
Opposed: None

Application - #2012-12 – Steven Roma – Block 179.03; Lot 9.06 – Applicant wishes to construct a front porch to existing single family dwelling bringing building coverage to 32.61%.

Carmine Villani, attorney for applicant. Applicant is requesting three (3) “C” variances. Robert Burdick, professional engineer and planner, sworn. The generator that is proposed is in a conforming position and will be elevated one foot to conform to FEMA requirements. The generator will run for ten minutes once a month to make sure everything is charged and working. Air conditioning compressors are cantilevered on decks that jut out less than two feet from the home but are within the five foot setback and require a variance. The porch will be added above the garage. The porch and the required stairs will bring building coverage to 32.61% and impervious coverage to 50.65%. The porch will be open and will add aesthetic appeal to the home. Steven P. Roma, applicant, sworn. A-3, photographs of home. Photos were taken by Carmine Villani about 5 hours prior to the meeting. Applicant stated that they need the generator because they have been without power a number of times and need it to keep the three refrigerators working. The porch will provide additional living space for the family.
No audience questions/comments
Deliberations
Wolfersberger – Does not have a problem with the impervious or side yard setback; I have a problem with building coverage. This area is over developed; the generator could be in the back of the garage.
Spader- Building coverage in this area of town is overcrowded. The generator is a good idea; bit of a stretch but I think I could go with the positive.

Reilly- The air conditioners are fine; is struggling a little bit with the building coverage. The rationale is we need this space for a nice porch and a generator. There are other places the generator could be placed.
Kelly- Does not have a building coverage problem. The generator problem could be replaced with a gasoline generator and placed somewhere else. .
Reynolds – I like the idea of a natural gas generator. I absolutely understand the need for a generator; it is a nice unit. Think it is a positive.
Renner – There is no one from the neighborhood here complaining about this application. I cannot see anyone noticing the building coverage. In favor.
Struncius – I think this is much ado about nothing; it is a high end unit. We are not creating anything negative. Believes there is an aesthetic value to the porch. The columns and the roof line add to the appeal of the home. In favor

Motion by Mr. Reynolds, second by Mr. Renner to approve application #2012-12 of Steven P. Roma with conditions.
In favor: Spader, Reilly, Struncius, Kelly, Reynolds and Renner
Opposed: Wolfersberger
Application approved with conditions

Conditions
The generator stack is to be camouflaged
The generator is to have a noise attenuation package.
The porch is not to be enclosed.
The generator is not to be run for more than 10 minutes per month for maintenance or in loss of power.


Application - #2012-13 Tammie Boydell – 1100 St. Louis Avenue -Block 32; Lot 11 – Applicant wishes to construct an open deck to existing single family dwelling bring building coverage to 36.7%.
Tammie Boydell, applicant, sworn. Applicant is looking to expand the existing deck to wrap around the front of the home. At present time she can only seat four people and her immediate family is eight. The deck would be made from pressure treated lumber with a vinyl railing. A-3, photos of home taken two weeks ago by applicant. The board inquired if the deck could a foot or less in height? (Yes)Mr. Reynolds stated that he would have a problem with the porch on the St. Louis side; He wouldn’t mind it expanded on the New York side, but the home is too close on St. Louis Avenue.
Deliberations
Wolfersberger – Corner lot is a unique challenge, however expanding non-conformity from fifteen 15 feet to nine foot is a considerable distance. My concern is building coverage and impervious; as it stands now I would not vote in favor.
Spader – It is a cute little seashore house; putting 70 feet of decking on the front of the home is just not an attractive thing. Some consideration could be given to the north side of the property. I would not be in support of this application.
Reilly – Has a problem with 37.6% coverage. Share concerns with extending the deck on the St. Louis side. I agree with Mr. Reynolds and think an expansion on the north side would be agreeable.
Kelly – One of his favorite houses. I didn’t like that they attached the garage; would rather see the garage area developed.
Reynolds – Concern is coverage. Would consider allowing deck to be expanded on north side.

Renner – Lives on a corner property also; attractive home. Would agree to expanding deck on north end. Would also hate to see the tree come down, it is a beautiful tree.
Struncius – Would like to see a rendering of what the deck will look like.

Dennis Galvin asked the applicant if she might like to revise her plan and come back on another evening. The board would like to see the building coverage come down.

Motion by Mr. Spader, second by Mr. Reynolds to carry application #2012-12 of Tammy Boydell to July 19, 2012 without notice.
In favor: Wolfersberger, Spader, Reilly, Struncius, Kelly, Reynolds and Renner
Opposed: None

Application #2012-15 – Mario and Roseanne Simione – Block 70; Lot 20 – Applicant wishes to construct a new family dwelling with building coverage at 45.67%

John Jackson, attorney for applicant. Stated that he knows what the Board is already thinking but request the board look at it and judge the application on its merit. The property is located on a corner lot which has its hardships. There are unique architectural details. The landscaping plan uses local plants to give it that seashore feel. The architect is a lifelong friend of the applicant. Robert Englert, Professional architect, RA and AIA, sworn. He has appeared before boards in Cranbury, Hamilton and Princeton. Credentials accepted. They have worked together and been friends for more than thirty years. This home is designed from decades of conversation about the perfect lot and the perfect views. This home is a culmination of drawings by the whole family. First level of home is the garage. Leaders from the home will be directing all storm water into infiltration planters that contain native vegetation. Habitable space is 3,800 square feet.
Exhibit A-10 Architectural Elevations of all four sides. Exhibit A-5 – Actual site. They decided that the home will front on Trenton Avenue. A-3 – Panoramic view Purposely set home back far enough not to obstruct neighbors view of the lake from their porch. Required setback encompasses 78% of the lot.
A-11 – Three dimensional views around the building; Robert Englert stated that much of the home is transparent. A- 7 – Rendering of how the home will look from the sidewalk. Trees and landscaping shown in drawing will remain. A – 12 – perspectives of each side; low planter with native vegetation which steps up to the next level where the pool railing would be. Outdoor shower is part of the patio and will not be enclosed. Proposing 45.67% building coverage; if you removed all the open porches and balconies you would have 32.54% building coverage. Robert Englert believes the porches and balconies add to the aesthetic appeal of the home. Balconies were strategically placed not to encroach on the adjoining properties. There are no projections at all on the western side. The applicant wanted every room to have a view and face the lake. Open porches are almost eight (8) feet deep. A – 10 – west façade - limited windows for neighbors privacy; no rooms on the west of the home.
Chairman Struncius inquired why the need for the roof top deck (with fire pit) when they have so many porches. A – 7, Robert Englert does not believe that the neighbors can see the roof terrace. Mr. Spader stated that sound travels from the roof tops. What guarantees are we going to have that the neighbors won’t be bothered from roof top parties? Robert Englert stated there are no guarantees besides the conditions that will be placed. Mr. Spader commented that it is a beautiful home but should not be where the homes are so close; that roof top deck will be a noise problem. Chairman Struncius stated that the roof top deck is a concern; it is an open area elevated 35 feet in the air that can potentially hold 35 – 40 people, it is a concern.
Robert Englert reviewed the required variances and drainage system. Audience questions/comments
Victor DeLuca, 306 Trenton Avenue - Complimented the architect on the design. He stated that the architect referenced that this home is consistent with homes in the area when it is not. The photos shown are mostly ocean front homes. Essentially what are consistent in the area are 1 and ½ story bungalows. This is not in character with the neighborhood. Exhibits - N-1, 2 and 3 – Photos of neighboring homes taken in 2006. Referenced A-3 – Simple lot 50 by 125 foot lot. There should be some leeway because of it being a corner lot, but the excessive building coverage should not be allowed. It is a beautiful building but not for this area. Referenced A-5 showing where there is flooding occurs in his yard. Concerned about a building that has so much deviation from what is allowed that a house of this magnitude will increase the flooding and be detrimental to the surrounding homes.
George Kippel, 302 Trenton Avenue – Also concerned about the flooding issues. Referenced homes that have had flooding losses through the year; Stated that the flooding plan was created to preserve homes. Photo, N – 4, 5, 6 and 7– shows water standing on subject property. Believes a home with this much building and impervious coverage will affect surrounding homes.
Jamie DeLuca, 306 Trenton Avenue – Also concerned about her view of the lake from her rear yard if this home is built. Concerned about the fourth floor deck. She stated that she hears the noise from the Boardwalk that she will hear the noise from the roof top deck.
Due to the lateness of the meeting this application will be carried.


Board comments and concerns

Wolfersberger – It is too high and over done. It is a beautiful home but not for this area.
Spader – It is not consistent with the neighborhood. We do not want to discourage you from putting the right sized home on this lot. Object to a backyard patio on the fourth floor.
Reilly - Nice family, gorgeous house. Have the same concerns as the others. Having a tough time with the this.
Chairman Struncius – The scale of this home is too much for this small corner lot.
Kelly – You have a fence and a retaining wall…That would be five feet from someone’s property line…my god that is too much.
Reynolds – 9 variances is a lot; it might be a record…If you come back I would like to hear more on the drainage.


Motion by Mr. Reilly, second by Mr. Spader to carry application #2012-12 of Maria and Roseanne Simione to September 20, 2012 without notice
In favor- Wolfersberger, Spader, Reilly, Struncius, Kelly, Reynolds and Renner.
Opposed


Meeting Adjourned at 11:03 pm
Attest – Karen L. Mills, Clerk of the Board


Published August09, 2012 | Board of Adjustment Minutes | 1429


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