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


October 18, 2012

Minutes

The October 18, 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, Struncius, Kelly, Reynolds, Ardito and Renner
Absent: Reilly and Loder

Motion by Mr. Reynolds, second by Mr. Wolfersberger to memorialize the minutes of September 20, 2012 meeting.

In favor: Wolfersberger, Spader, Kelly and Ardito
Opposed: None

Be it resolved by the Board of Adjustment that it hereby memorializes the action and vote approving application #2012-22 of Noreen Laico with conditions.
In favor: Wolfersberger, Spader, Kelly and Ardito
Opposed: None

Application #2012-24 – James and Marita Decos – 508 Laurel Avenue – Block 77; Lot 11 – Applicant is seeking determination that the property is a valid pre-existing non-conforming use.
James Decos, applicant sworn stated that he has owned the property for 35 years and that it has been a two-family home for 65 years. Exhibit A-3 – Utility bill showing separate meters. Originally he rented it to tenants, at the present his daughters are living there. Mr. Reynolds inquired if each unit has its own kitchen and bathroom. (Yes) Ray Savacool read attachment “A” into the record which documents the zoning change occurred in 1971; the home in questions predates the zoning change.
Joe Leone, 510 Laurel – Stated that James Decos is a wonderful neighbor; they take care of their property and it has been a true pleasure to be their neighbor and wants to support James Decos.

Deliberations
Mr. Wolfersberger – Believes there is enough information to determine that the home predates the ordinance change.
Mr. Spader – Agrees with Mr. Wolfersberger and commented that it is an attractive property.
Mr. Reynolds – Believes the proofs have been met.
Motion by Mr. Reynolds, second by Mr. Wolfersberger to approve application #2012-22 of James Decos certifying the property was a pre-existing non-conformity (two-family home).
In favor: Wolfersberger, Spader, Kelly, Struncius, Reynolds, Ardito and Renner
Opposed - None

Application approved



Application #2012-20 – Patricia Short – 12 Inlet Drive – Block 176; Lot 39 – Applicant wishes to construct a second story deck to existing single family dwelling.
Robert Burdick, Professional Engineer/Planner, sworn. Credential accepted. Patricia Short, applicant sworn. Robert Burdick stated that the applicant requires a D-2 variance because they are requesting expansion of a non-conforming use. Property is only 2,000 square feet; all bulk variances are pre-existing. Front setback will be reduced from 14.32 feet to 8.32 feet which will line up will all the other structures. Proposed deck will be constructed in line with the other structures and thus will be consistent with the development in the neighborhood and will not adversely impact the area.
Building coverage will increase from 37% to 47% which is entirely from the proposed second floor deck. Access to the deck will be from existing opening; the deck will be open which will not impede the neighboring views. The deck will provide an aesthetic appeal to the property. It is a unique property which has views of the inlet and ocean. Robert Burdick believes the variances can be granted without substantial detriment to the zoning ordinance, master plan or public good.
Patricia Short stated that they side deck was on the home when she purchased it four (4) years ago. Mr. Kelly inquired if a variance had been secured for the side deck. (Does not know)
Mr. Wolfersberger commented that some might say that this is not aesthetically appealing. I like it the way it is now and it is a lot of building coverage; it is a 25% increase. The Board has some concerns as far as access to the deck and future owners enclosing the deck. Mr. Renner suggested that removal of the concrete on the west side of the home would help improve the impervious calculations. Bob Burdick said that the concrete could be removed on the east side. Chairman Struncius commented that the removal of any concrete would be beneficial. A-4 entered – photo of neighbor’s property; this is the look they are going for except that they want horizontal slats. Board s not happy with description of deck; needs more details. Mr. Reynolds is concerned with the distance of the slats and the safety to children.


Audience Questions/Comments
Paul Lasowski, 8 Hastings Ave – Stated that it seems unfair to restrict them from putting an awning on; it will not block anyone’s view.

Chairman Struncius wants to know the final percentages; Bob Burdick said that they will remove enough concrete to hold impervious where it currently is.

Conditions
1. Second floor deck in front of the home is not to have a canopy.
2. The plan is to be revised to remove a sufficient amount of concrete to ensure that the impervious coverage does not exceed the existing condition of 63%. Revised plan is to be submitted to the Board Engineer for his review.
3. The only access to the deck will be the existing doorway on the side of the house.

Deliberations

Wolfersberger – Obviously he would like to see a little green show up; with the concrete going will be inclined to improve application.
Spader – Believes that everybody has the right to use their property to the fullest; would be in favor.
Kelly – This is one of the better homes and I believe the deck will enhance it.
Reynolds – I have an issue because there is already a sizeable deck and there are a ton of variances and this will just make them worse.
Ardito – Needs to know the materials that will be used for the deck. Does not believe the applicant should be penalized for the size of the deck; looking forward to seeing what the deck will look like to be fully on board with it.
Renner – With conditions in place would be in favor.
Struncius - Wants to see where we are aesthetically? Chairman would like to see more detail and specific materials. The location of the property warrants the ability to have decking like that, that also matches the surrounding properties. How you incorporate the deck into the house is a serious request, do not take it lightly. The aesthetic effect is very important and right now we have nothing.
Motion by Mr. Wolfersberger, second by Mr. Reynolds to carry application #2012-20 to November 1, 2012 without notice
In favor: Wolfersberger, Spader, Kelly, Struncius, Reynolds, Ardito and Renner
Opposed: None

Application #2012-21 – Anthony and Joan Graceffo - 107 Boardwalk – Block 121; Lot 18.01 -Applicant wishes to construct a two-story addition with a garage below (three stories from Pilgrim Pathway/two stories from the Boardwalk) to an existing three story (as described) single family dwelling.
Steven A. Pardes, attorney for applicant. Joan Graceffo, applicant, sworn stated that she owns three ocean front homes. Applicant has lived in the one home for over 50 years. Applicant wants to reside in home all year so they need to make the upgrades to the home to accommodate their physical disabilities and to allow emergency vehicles to access the home. Applicant will be removing the over grown landscaping in front of the home and the rear pool. Steven Pardes stated that there are a number of variances required; side setbacks, three stories and height which are all pre-existing. The home next door is one story in height. The heating unit and a/c units will be moved from under the neighbor’s windows to the roof top; there will be full access to the roof. The applicant stated that 50% of the ocean front property exceeds the height limit; most of the new homes exceed the height requirement. Applicant does not believe that the proposed improvements will have a negative impact on the surrounding properties. There will a two-car garage with an elevator. The applicant stated that the roof line will be mock-hip which she believes will be aesthetically pleasing. Mechanicals will be located on the mock-hip roof. Master bedroom will be located above the garage and the other bedrooms will be located on the third level.
Mr. Ardito questioned if any portion of the home is located in the VE flood zone. (Yes – Engineer will address) Mr. Ardito inquired if the upgrade will represent 50% or greater improvement? (Does not know) Ray Savacool confirmed that the home is in the VE flood zone. Mr. Spader inquired how many cars the new home would accommodate (5) Mr. Reynolds inquired if there is a brand new bathroom and laundry room on the first floor. (Yes) Mr. Reynolds questioned whether there will be a deck on the roof? (No, just observation) Mr. Wolfersberger has concerns about the home to the north; with a 25 foot rear addition at three floors in height it will block light and air flow. Steve Pardes stated that there is a large rear setback. Mr. Kelly replied that his home is right up there in comparison to the smaller homes on Pilgrim Pathway. Mr. Renner stated that we do not know how far back the shadows will go from this large home. Mr. Renner also commented that he likes the greenery in front of this home and if it is being removed he would like to see the landscape plan. Chairman Struncius was concerned with the free access to the roof; with the reconfiguration of the roof you can fit a lot more people. Chairman Struncius also commented that the applicant is removing the third floor and redoing the entire layout of the floor.
James Giordano, Professional Engineer, sworn, stated that a dual flow drainage system will be used. Propose to remove retaining wall and lower back of property to meet existing grade in the area which will allow for additional parking in rear. Mr. Ardito questioned about the building meeting FEMA requirements. James Giordano replied that the construction department will make sure that the building meets all the codes. Chairman Struncius pointed out that there are five (5) bathrooms going on the third floor. James Giordano replied that there are seven (7) bedrooms. Mr. Reynolds wants clarification on the first floor that is habitable; he said it is definitely not a basement. Ray Savacool stated that it is above grade so it is a floor, not a basement.
No audience questions/comments
Steven Pardes stated that there have been a great deal of concerns mentioned by the board and that the applicant would like some time to review their application.
Steven Pardes waived the time that the Board has to hear the application.

Motion by, second by to carry application #2012-21 of Anthony and Joan Graceffo to February 21, 2013 without notice.
In favor: Wolfersberger, Spader, Kelly, Struncius, Reynolds, Ardito and Renner
Opposed: None

Motion to adjourn at 10:20 PM

Attest: Karen L. Mills, clerk


Published December05, 2012 | Board of Adjustment Minutes | 1480


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