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


November 29, 2012

Minutes

The November 29, 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: Spader, Kelly, Reilly, Reynolds, Ardito, Renner and Loder
Absent: Wolfersberger and Struncius

Motion by Mr. Reynolds, second by Mr. Ardito to memorialize the minutes of October 18, 2012

In favor: Spader, Kelly, Reynolds, Ardito and Renner
Opposed: None


Motion by Mr. Spader, second by Mr. Reynolds to memorialize the action and vote approving application #2012-24 of James Decos.
In favor: Spader, Kelly, Reynolds, Ardito and Renner
Opposed: None


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.

Patricia Short, applicant sworn. Robert D. Molner, applicant’s builder, sworn stated that the deck will be constructed of PVC and meet all codes. The slats will be cable to preserve the view. The post will be white (brochure exhibit A-4) and the cable (Exhibit A-5) will be grey metal. Photo of home entered as exhibit A-3. Patricia Short stated that after the storm the first floor needs to be renovated but the building is structurally sound.
Deliberations
Spader – The decking is certainly satisfactory and will be in favor.
Kelly - I concur
Ardito - has no objections
Renner – no objections
Reilly – In favor with conditions in place
Let the record reflect that Mr. Reilly listened to the previous audio of the meeting and has signed a certification.

Conditions
1. Second floor deck in front of home is not to have a canopy.
2. Applicant is to remove a sufficient amount of concrete so that impervious is 63%, revised plan is to be submitted to the Board’s Engineer for his review and approval.
3. The only access to the deck will be the existing doorway on the side of the home.
4. The look of the deck is to be constructed as shown to the board at the November 29, 2012 meeting and as shown in the drawing marked into evidence as A-3.


Motion by Mr. Spader, second by Mr. Kelly to approve application #2012-20 of Patricia Short with conditions

In favor: Spader, Kelly, Reynolds, Reilly, Ardito and Renner
Opposed: None

Application approved with conditions



Application ##2012- 19 – Sweet Escape Bungalow, L.L.C. c/o Frank Dominguez - 115 Randall Avenue – Block 150; Lot 8 – Applicant wishes to demolish and construct a new single family dwelling.
John Jackson, attorney for applicant stated that the applicant has redesigned the home to reduce the size. Elevation of this home is a very appropriate design for this location; it allows for parking and moves everything out of the flood elevation. In light of recent events this home should be the prototype for homes in this area. Adam Steuerman, attorney for objectors (Marazitti and McAndrews) formally placed an objection on record that this application should be barred due to res judacata. Adam Steuerman does not believe that the new plans have a significant deviation from the original application that was denied. John Jackson stated his facts on why he does not agree; the home is smaller and is a different design. Dennis Galvin stated that you cannot make a decision on res judacata until you have heard all the testimony.
William Stevens, Professional Engineer/Planner, credentials accepted. A-3, colored rendition marked proposed single family home, A-4 Aerial photo, A-5 Mounted colored architectural elevation, A-6 architectural layout prepared by ASA design, A-6 portion of the tax map and photos of structures in the vicinity. William Steven addressed the Engineers letter. Home will be built on existing footprint. The roof has been lowered five feet from original proposal to 29.89 feet which is a significant change. Home will accommodate three cars to park underneath the home. The lower level with have decorative screening; there is approximately 1,750 square feet of living space. The home has been reduced six feet in the rear to bring it more into compliance. Variance required for front yard of “0” feet due to steps. Building coverage variance is for 60% where 30% is permitted; impervious coverage variance is 65.8% where 50% is permitted. Building height will be 29.8 feet where 35 feet is permitted. The floor of the lower level will be honeycomb pavers.
Audience questions/ comments
Adam Steuerman- inquired how many bedrooms (4) Questioned testimony about surrounding properties and questioned variances requested.
Jamie Paradise – 119B Randall Avenue, inquired if there are four (4) bedrooms in the present home. (yes). Asked for clarification if the applicant would be able to rebuild on the existing foot print to flood elevation without a variance. (Possibly, there is an ordinance being proposed)

Alex Soffiantini, professional architect, sworn, credentials accepted. Exhibit A-8 Elevations and architectural drawings. Alex Soffiantini reviewed the plans and addressed the concerns over the windows and explained that the one side does not have windows because three feet off the property line is required to have window. If the home was centered on the lot, neither side of the home would be able to have windows because each side yard setback would be less than three feet.
Frank Dominguez, applicant, sworn. Has owned the property for a year; family enjoyed staying here last summer. He takes pride in the homes where he lives. He might put garage doors in for privacy. Stated he had 3 ½ feet of water in the home during Hurricane Sandy; pretty much everything was destroyed. He has two docks in the rear for his boat.
Adam Steuerman - How many bedrooms are there currently. (4) Inquired what the applicant’s intensions are after construction? (To utilize for his family in the summer) Inquired what the applicant does for a living? (Real Estate Developer)

Tom Spader is concerned that if there are garage doors that somewhere down the line it will be enclosed and then become habitable space. John Jackson said the applicant is open to a deed restriction that it will remain open to alert future owners.
Adam Steuerman called his witnesses –
Sal Marraziti - Lives at 18 Fisk Street in Manasquan and owns 113 Randall Avenue here in Point Pleasant Beach. Exhibits Photos N1 through N15 entered – voiced his concerns over his views and other issues
Joyce Marraziti – Lives at 18 Fisk Manasquan, NJ. Owns 113 Randall is concerned with the solid wall next to her with no windows. She does not think that it is aesthetically pleasing and is concerned with runoff.
Mary Mc Andrew – lives at 92 Highfield Lane in Nutley, NJ and owns 117 Randall Avenue is also concerned with the size of the home and the loss of views.
Mrs. Gregovich – lives at 11 Forest Trail in Denville, NJ and owns 115A Randall Avenue. It concerned with the size and loss of views.
Jamie Paradise – 119 B Randall Avenue – is in favor of this application; believes they did the best they can do.
Adam Steuerman gave his closing argument.
John Jackson gave his closing arguments

Deliberations

Spader – Likes the effort that was put into this application to reduce height. Board’s job is to improve the housing stock; this application is different and moves the housing stock forward. The neighbor’s will still have the rear yard view. I hope that this home will happen more often down the road. Will support this application.
Kelly – Agrees with Mr. Spader; still concerned with emergency access. Commends the architect with the changes. Will be in favor.
Reynolds - I like to believe that the plans and current events have made this different enough that res judacata does not apply. I believe that there will be more space and air with the home raised and addresses the parking issues. Home will be up to all current codes and do not believe this is a bad direction for this area. Has no problem with this application.
Ardito - Does like what he sees. The positives are we will get homes that are in compliance. There will be some negative impacts but the positives outweigh the negatives. You have to think a little bit broader. What is good for the community; you might have some loss of view but what you are getting is one less home that is susceptible to flooding. The parking and aesthetics are a plus.
Renner - The setbacks are there because there were no regulations at the time, the neighbors’ concerns are valid but there are a lot of positives. In favor
Loder - Believes the benefits outweigh detriments…In favor
Reilly – Originally was not in favor, I am impressed with the efforts to reduce and minimize the height. With the deed restriction in place , pavers and it complying with flood elevation and being built to code will be an improvement. Thinks more broadly that he is not crazy about it but cannot think of a better alternative.

Conditions
1. Confirmation of base flood elevation
2. Garage area is not to be used for storage or used for habitable purposes. This is to be documented in a deed restriction.
3. The garage floor is to be comprised of honeycomb pavers.

Motion by Mr. Reynolds, second by Mr. Loder to approve application #2012-19 with conditions.
In favor: Spader, Kelly, Reynolds, Reilly, Ardito, Renner and Loder
Opposed: None
Application approved with conditions

Attest: Karen L. Mills, Clerk of the Board
Meeting Adjourned at 10:52pm


Published December07, 2012 | Board of Adjustment Minutes | 1482


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