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


July 10, 2013

Minutes

The July 10, 2013 Regular meeting of the Point Pleasant Beach Board of Adjustment opened at 7:30 pm. The clerk read the notice of compliance with the "Open Public Meetings Act. Present were regular members: Mr. Spader, Mr. Reilly, Mr. Kelly, Chairman Struncius, Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Ardito, Mr. Renner and Mr. Davis
Absent - Wolfersberger, Loder and Shamy

Motion by Mr. Reilly, second by Mr. Kelly to memorialize the minutes of May16, 2013
In favor: Spader, Reilly, Kelly, Ardito, Struncius and Davis
Opposed: None


Be it resolved by the Board of Adjustment that it hereby memorializes the action and vote approving the following applications with conditions:

Motion by Mr. Spader, second Mr. Ardito to memorialize the action and vote approving Bob Santanello # 2013-29 with conditions –
In favor – Spader, Kelly, Reilly, Reynolds, Ardito and Renner

Motion by Mr. Kelly, second by Mr. Reilly to memorialize the action and vote approving application#2013-25 of Mary Pascale with conditions.
In favor: Spader, Kelly, Reilly, Reynolds, Ardito, Renner and Struncius
Motion by Mr. Reilly, second by Mr. Renner to memorialize the action and vote approving application #2013-23 of Carol Allesso with conditions
In favor: Spader, Reilly, Ardito, Renner and Struncius
Motion by Mr. Ardito, second by Mr. Reilly to memorialize the action and vote approving application #2013-20 of William Kane with condition
In favor – Spader, Kelly, Reilly, Reynolds, Ardito, Renner and Struncius


Application #2013- 31 – Lawrence Evans – 306 Lincoln Avenue – Block 205; Lot 8 – Applicant wishes to add a 10 foot by 20 foot second story addition (bathroom and closet) to existing single family dwelling.
Lawrence Evans, applicant sworn stated that he is seeking to construct a second floor addition to his home. His home was constructed in 1918, and the applicant’s proposal will preserve the original character of the home which currently has existing setback violations, and due to the nature of the applicant’s lot, there is nowhere to place the addition that will conform. The applicant’s proposal will not increase the house’s footprint and the addition will match the existing stucco of the home. The size of the second floor addition will be 10 x 20 feet.
The Board finds that the house will be aesthetically pleasing, consistent with the other homes in the neighborhood, and will be an improvement to the housing stock of the Borough of Point Pleasant Beach and that the site can accommodate the overall size of the house. The Board felt the proposed building design was very attractive and that there are no substantial negative impacts arising from this proposal as the front porch will not impinge on the light, air, or privacy of the surrounding property owners. The benefits of this proposal outweigh its detriments.
No audience questions/comments
Deliberations
Spader – Examined property and it is a modest addition and will have no objections to it.
Kelly – Aesthetically it will make the home look better and the setbacks are preexisting. In favor.
Reilly – We rarely use the word de minimis but it is applicable here. Will be in favor.
Reynolds – I have no objections whatsoever and almost question why we are here.
Ardito – It is nice to have an application where height is not an issue. No expansion of the footprint – In favor
Renner – No problem I think it will be a nice addition.
Davis - Well said ..that is that

Motion by Mr. Reynolds, second by Mr. Reilly to approve application #2013-31 of Lawrence Evans with conditions

In favor - Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Spader, Mr. Kelly, Mr. Reilly, Mr. Ardito, Mr. Renner, Chairman Struncius.

Opposed - None
Application approved with conditions

Application #2013-33 – Cyril /Erica Goddeeris – 1204 Ocean Avenue – Block 28.01; Lot 3 – Applicant wishes to demolish existing single family dwelling and construct a new single family dwelling at the ABFE.
Christopher Rice, AIA, applicant’s architect, sworn stated that the applicant’s lot is oversized in area, and is long due to its beachfront location. The applicant’s house has bedrooms on the first floor, while the kitchen is on the second floor. The applicant’s house was destroyed during the course of Hurricane Sandy, and the first floor was completely flooded and the applicant’s proposes to add a chimney that will extend approximately fourteen inches outside of the exterior of the house. The chimney is 24 inches in width, with ten inches recessed into the house. The applicant’s plan includes a set of stairs on the side entrance to the house that lead to a mudroom and the side mudroom stairs will require a three foot landing outside of the door. The entry is recessed into the mudroom by five feet and the side mudroom stairs will be covered. The side mudroom steps are necessary to get into the raised house, and will encroach onto the setback. The applicant will raise the house slightly above the advisory base flood level. The ABFE for the applicant’s zone requires 12 feet of clearance, while the applicant’s plans will raise the house to 14 feet. The applicant will place the air conditioner condenser units within the footprint of the house.
Erica Goddeeris, applicant, sworn, stated that the house on the property was destroyed by Hurricane Sandy due to flooding of the first floor. The applicant proposes to demolish the existing house and rebuild the house on the property. The applicant’s family has lived on the property for a long time, and intends to remain there.

Jim O’Brady, of 1209 Ocean Front, stated that he believed the applicant’s proposal will be a great addition to the area and the town.

Chris Kaizor, of 1206 Ocean Avenue, also stated that he believed that the applicant’s proposal will be a great addition to the area. He also raised concerns about emergency access on the property, specifically in the case of fire.

Conditions
1. The applicant is to build the home as shown to the Board and as described at the time of the hearing.

2. The foundation system shall comply with the V zone requirements.

3. The applicant shall comply with all dune easement requirements.

4. The building shall be constructed as represented to the Board at the time of the hearing.
5. The building shall maintain all bulk requirements with the exception of the stairs and chimney.

Deliberations
Spader – Having grown up on Washington Avenue looking at the family compound; not knowing why it wasn’t subdivided years ago. This is going to be a wonderful addition and the idea that they are going to keep it as it has been is a wonderful thing.
Kelly - Having spent the last 50 years on Washington I echo the same remarks. Always wondered why the property had not been improved; it is a gem.
Reilly – Clearly an improvement; it looks like a very first class kind of job. Congratulate the architect.
Reynolds – If it wasn’t for the odd shaped lot we probably wouldn’t be here; definitely looking favorable on this.
Ardito – Without the stairs and chimney we wouldn’t be here; we are getting a safe up to flood code home. For all those reasons I am in favor.
Renner – Nice to see the neighbors here in support; sounds like we have room for safety and it is a beautiful home.
Davis – So far we have a gem and a pearl and a flood compliant home.
Struncius - Nothing more to add
Motion by Mr. Reilly, second by Mr. Ardito to approve application #2013-33 of Cyril/Erica Goddeeris with conditions
In favor: Spader, Kelly, Reilly, Reynolds, Ardito, Renner and Struncius
Opposed: None

Application approved with conditions

Application #2013-26 – Michael Kostecki – 19 Niblick Street – Block 130; Lot 3 – Applicant wishes to demolish one of two existing dwellings at Niblick Lake Louise Condominiums and construct a new three story dwelling.
Steven A. Pardes, the applicant’s attorney stated that the applicant’s property is a single large lot with two separate structures on it. The previous owner of the property attempted to subdivide the property to separate the structures twenty years ago, but his request was denied. The Master Deed for the property describes each structure as having its own metes and bounds, as if they were sitting on separate lots. The one house controls a set amount of the property while the other house controls the balance. Effectively, both houses are separate properties in function, but are not officially two separate lots.
The applicant’s house is currently at 29% building coverage of the area of that portion of the lot that is allotted to it per the Master Deed and is currently at 35.84% impervious coverage of the area of that portion of the lot that is allotted to it per the Master Deed. The other house is on a larger area of the property.
Michael Kostecki, applicant sworn stated the he has owned the property for 3.5 years. The original structure was a house when the applicant purchased it. Hurricane Sandy destroyed the house, knocking the original house down and that the concrete slab upon which the house sat is damaged. The new home proposed will comply with all setbacks, height requirements, and lot coverage’s and will reduce the overall lot coverage of the entire lot by approximately 8%.


The applicant’s contractor, Terrence Hegel, stated that the house was destroyed during Hurricane Sandy and that the entire first floor was submerged in water. The original structure was a house, and was 1,800 square feet in area and the applicant’s proposal has three bedrooms; two are upstairs with their own bathrooms, with a single guest bedroom downstairs. The applicant has shifted the proposed house forward in order to conform to a setback and to avoid blocking his neighbor’s views and the design is high quality and aesthetically pleasing. The foundation will consist of a decorative exterior foundation or siding and the applicant will place the mechanical equipment in the garage area above the base flood elevation. The air conditioning units will be placed in the rear yard 5 feet off of the eastern setback, and will be elevated and the applicant will install the furnace in the attic. The curb cut will be reduced to whatever is allowable, with a single driveway to the garage door. The garage level will be on the concrete slab, with a breakaway wall and pilings. No plumbing or local amenities will be on the ground level floor, with only some wiring for grounding. The house needs to be elevated and will utilize breakaway walls and pilings. There will be access to the area under the roof, where the furnace is located. It will be three (3) to four (4) feet in height.

The Board concluded that the applicant’s proposal is attractive and will contribute positively to the community and that the applicant’s proposal brings the house up to code and will be a safe, habitable replacement for the destroyed home. There are no substantial negative impacts arising from this proposal as the front porch will not impinge on the light, air, or privacy of the surrounding property owners. The benefits of this proposal outweigh its detriments.

Conditions
1. The applicant shall comply with all bulk requirements with the exception of the front yard setback and stories.

2. First floor of the building shall be constructed with a decorative exterior foundation or siding, the revised plan must be submitted to the Board Engineer for his review and approval.

3. The first floor shall be used for storage and parking only. There is to be no plumbing or habitation ever on the first floor. The Deed restriction is to be reviewed and approved by the Board’s Attorney and recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit.

4. Building shall comply with all flood elevation requirements of the AE flood zone.

5. The building shall be constructed as represented to the Board at the time of the hearing.

10. Applicant shall comply with the maximum curb cut width requirements of 16 feet for a single car garage width.

11. Applicant shall remove the existing pavers on the west side of lot; the driveway may not extend past the stairway.

12. Revised plans shall be submitted to the Board Engineer for his review and approval.

13. The common element line of the condominium association shall determine setback requirements.


Deliberations
Spader – No question in my mind if this was a regular application it would take a lot more convincing to get approval. The applicant was very sensitive to the setbacks; two stories with some storage space and under the height. The way it is right now will be in favor.
Kelly – Happy to see the adjustment to the front to control the parking. Likes the plan will be in favor.
Reilly – Applicant is reducing impervious coverage and we are getting a safer house. In favor
Reynolds – This is a unique application – we are getting a flood compliant home. You have moved the home forward, it is a good project and a nice addition.
Ardito – This is a first for me – this is an unusual arrangement. Looking at the property on its own and what the applicant is asking for is appropriate for the residence. We are getting a flood compliant up to code home. In favor
Renner – Normally we would look at this and say we are sorry your home was destroyed and we are getting an up to code home. Will be in favor
Davis - The difficulty with the property situation makes it difficult to make improvements. This application does it very nicely.
Struncius – Certainly two structures on one lot is an unique situation. You are trying to do something and technically you can’t. I think the setbacks are di minimus; we are getting parking, home does have architectural features which create an appeal aesthetically and the safety are all positive.
Motion by Mr. Spader, second by Mr. Reilly to approve application #2013-26 of Michael Kostecki with conditions
In favor: Spader, Reilly, Kelly, Reynolds, Ardito, Renner and Struncius
Opposed: None

Meeting adjourned at 9:25pm
Attest: Karen L. Mills, Clerk of the Board


Published September11, 2013 | Board of Adjustment Minutes | 1670


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