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

September 19, 2013


The September 19, 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. Kelly, Mr. Reilly, Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Ardito, Mr. Renner Mr. Davis
Absent – Struncius, Wolfersberger and Loder

Memorialization of Resolutions
Memorialization of July 24thth, 2013 minutes – Motion by Mr. Davis, second by Mr. Kelly to memorialize.

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

Memorialization of August 15, 2013 minutes – Motion by Mr. Kelly, second by Mr. Ardito to memorialize
In favor – Kelly, Ardito, Reynolds, Reilly, Ardito and Davis
Opposed: None
Motion by Mr. Kelly, second by Mr. Ardito to memorialize the action and vote approving application 2013-44 of Nancy Gimbert with conditions
In favor: Spader, Kelly, Ardito, Renner and Davis
Opposed: None
Motion by Mr. Reynolds, second by Mr. Kelly to memorialize the action and vote approving application 2013-49 of Katherine Blinn with conditions
In favor: Kelly, Reynolds, Spader and Reilly
Opposed: None

Application # 2013-51 – Christian/Mary Pirl - 307 Laurel Court – Block 87.01; Lot 15 – Applicant wishes to demolish storm damaged home and build a new single family home to the ABFE.
John Jackson, attorney for applicant stated that the applicant is seeking the following variances: building height of 37.8 feet eight inches, whereas 35 feet is the maximum permitted; building height in stories of 3 ½, whereas 2 stories is the maximum permitted.
John J. Jackson, Esquire, stated that the applicant proposes to replace an existing house that was damaged during Hurricane Sandy. The height variances are driven by the applicant’s need to comply with FEMA regulations, to have a garage underneath the house and for space in the attic to support the elevator. The applicant’s daughter has special needs that require the use of an elevator and a large handicapped accessible van.

Kurt J. Ludwig, Professional architect, AIA, stated that the applicant proposes demolishing the 1 ½ frame house that was damaged during Hurricane Sandy. The applicant is proposing to construct a 3 ½ single family dwelling. The garage underneath the house is considered a story. The actual living space will be limited to two stories’ the ½ story attic space will only be used for storage. The main entrance of the house will be on Laurel Court. The garage entry will be from Freedom Lane and the house will be built in a traditional style. The façade will have cedar shake siding, a dimensional roof, and will have white trim. The cedar shake siding will be brought down about 4 feet to cover the masonry wall so the masonry exposure will be limited to 5 feet and the applicant will add foundation plantings to cover the exposed masonry. The applicant will submit a landscape plan to the Board Engineer for his review and approval. The height of the proposed building will be 37 feet 8 inches because the current FEMA guidelines require the house to be elevated 5 feet higher than the existing house. The increase in height is also due to the elevator being installed in the garage and the mechanics that are necessary for a garage door opener. The roof pitch in the attic is 7 feet in height. The Board discussed reducing the roof pitch, however, it was decided that the house would not look as attractive with a lower roof pitch. There will not be any plumbing or bedrooms located in the attic and the elevator will be operational from the garage level to the first and second floors of the house. The main living area will be an open floor plan with a kitchen, dining area, and living area; there will be one (1) bedroom, a bathroom, and a powder room. The second level will include four (4) bedrooms, bathroom, front deck, and a walk up stairs to the ½ story attic. The attic consists of 407 square feet and is 7 feet in height which complies with the Ordinance. The second floor is 1,690 square feet in size and the 407 square feet of attic space is under the one-third rule. There will not be any plumbing in the attic. The attic will house the air handler mechanicals and the mechanicals for the elevator. The ground level ceiling is at 8 ½ feet. The first floor finished floor will be at 9 ½ feet. The grade is at 6 feet and the Advisory Base Flood Elevation is at 11 feet. The first floor will comply at 15 and ½ feet.

Christian Pirl, applicant, sworn stated he will be removing one (1) large oak tree from his property. The tree was damaged during the storm and it is unhealthy but he will save as many trees as possible. The applicant’s daughter has special needs due to being hit by a drunk driver which caused a brain injury and paralysis of her left side. The elevator will be used to enable his daughter to get from the living space of the house to the handicapped accessible van stored in the garage.

The Board found that the house will be compliant with the base flood elevation and the house will be brought up to code both of which improve public safety. There are no substantial negative impacts arising from this proposal as it will not impinge on the light, air, or privacy of the surrounding property owners and that the benefits of this proposal outweigh its detriments.
Spader – It is a beautiful house and lowering it by one foot will make it more acceptable. Based on what was presented I will be in favor.
Kelly – Glad to see that you are building a new home. Coverage and impervious are not an issue: in favor. Has no objection to original height of home.
Reynolds – Good looking home and is in favor of the application without modifications. More concerned what the home will look like if they lower it. Much happier with roof line the way it is; believe it is a mistake if they squish the roof line.
Ardito – Sorry that they have has this experience. You will now have a home that is safe and good for your daughter. The number of the stories is something we have to live with by ordinance; has no problem with the original height of the application. I think it is a good project and will be in favor.
Renner: Testimony was very good by the applicant to put it in perspective and have no problem with the application.
Loder: I do not have a problem with the current height as designed based on the special needs of the applicant. Will be in favor
Davis – I would also like to reiterate what other board members have said. The applicant’s testimony put a whole new light on the applications.
Chairman Reilly – Testimony of Mr. Pirl put a whole new perspective on the application. Will be in favor as proposed.

1. The plan is to be to show that there will not be more than 500 square feet of habitable space on the third floor attic space. The revised plan is to be reviewed and approved by the Board’s Engineer.

2. The siding shall be brought down lower as described to the Board at the time of the hearing.

3. The applicant is to submit a landscape plan which will include foundation plantings to cover the masonry base of the house to the Board’s Engineer for his review and approval.

Motion by Mr. Reynolds, second by Mr. Ardito to approve application #2013-51 of Mary/Christian Pirl with conditions
In favor: Spader, Kelly, Reynolds, Ardito, Renner, Loder and Chairman Reilly
Opposed: None

Application approved with conditions

Application #2013-48 – Gail Connolly – 1507 Oceanfront – Block 13.11 ; Lot 8 - Applicant wishes to demolish existing storm damaged single family dwelling and construct a new single family dwelling at the new ABFE.
The applicant is requesting the following variances; a height variance (in stories) for the construction of a 3-story house, whereas 2-stories is the maximum permitted; a height variance (in feet) of 38 feet, whereas 35 feet is the maximum permitted ;a front yard setback of 17.7 feet from Carter Avenue; a rear yard setback of 23.2 feet from Boardwalk right-of-way (to steps) and 14.2 feet access easement, whereas 25 feet is required and building coverage of 31.0%, whereas 30% is the maximum permitted.

John J. Jackson, attorney for applicant stated that the applicant’s house was substantially damaged by Hurricane Sandy. The house is on a corner lot on the south end of town on the beach along Carter Avenue and the alleyway and the setback variances are driven by the fact that the side yard is the front yard. The height variance is caused by meeting the Base Flood Elevation regulations and the applicant is proposing to use underneath the house as a garage which will make this house a three-story structure.

Robert C. Burdick, P.E., P.P., Professional Engineer and Professional Planner stated that the proposal is for the reconstruction and lifting of a single family ocean front home. The applicant is proposing to expand and slightly relocate the structure on the property. The property consists of a 2-story single family home and a 299 square foot detached garage located on the western side of the lot 3.5 feet from the alley. Since the garage will not be rebuilt, the applicant will eliminate a need for that variance. The detached garage was damaged during Hurricane Sandy and was removed and the construction of the home will meet all FEMA and building code requirements. There will be no habitation on the lower floor. That area will be used as a garage and storage area only. The open porch within the rear yard setback will have a roof on it which will enable the applicant to have a second floor deck as well. The building coverage is 31% and 30% is permitted. The increase in building coverage is caused by landings and steps which compromise 2.3% of the property. The steps alone take up 1.1% of the property. The steps are necessary to bring the structure into compliance with FEMA regulations. Therefore, the building coverage variance is very minimal. The house will be a two-story house with the garage underneath creating the third story. There is no habitable attic on this structure.
The applicant had 3 to 4 feet of sand in their house after Hurricane Sandy. The house was at elevation 15. The applicant proposes to elevate the house to 21.8 feet to allow for 9 feet below the structure to use as a garage. The home is modest in size, is attractive, and is in character with the rest of the neighborhood. The house will be aesthetically pleasing and will be safer through compliance with building codes and flood codes. The proposed house will have minimal effect on adjacent property owners as most adjacent structures will have to be lifted as well. The actual height of the house itself is 27 feet (from floor to peak of roof.
William Brown, AIA, the applicant’s architect stated that the house will have classic lines and have dimensional shingles. The siding will be a natural cedar shingle which will be stained. The windows will be Anderson windows with grills on the exterior and there will be a lot of trim with crown moldings. The garage will be built on a slab and will have 8 foot break away walls and the garage will have classic doors. The ceiling height on the lowest level is 8 feet which will accommodate an electric operator for the garage doors. The first floor will have 9 foot ceilings and will have a modern open floor plan. It will consist of a family room, kitchen, laundry room, bathroom and guestroom. The second floor living space will have 8 foot ceilings. It will consist of 2 bedrooms facing west 11’ x 11’ feet in size. There will also be a bathroom and a master bedroom suite on the ocean side of the house. The roof pitch is 6 feet on 12 feet and the house is 2,640 square feet in size. The length of the new house is 50 feet and the new home will have a 10 x 26 foot porch along the back. The porches on the east side acts as a wind barrier which will help protect the house during storms. The garage size is 27’ x 12’ on the right side and 18’ x 12’ on the left side. The porch and the house will be constructed on piles and the piles will be enclosed with breakaway tethered walls.
The covered porch does not create as much bulk and it allows more light and air to the benefit of the neighbors. The porch will never be permitted to be enclosed. The attic has pull down stairs which is to get to the equipment in the attic. No windows are proposed for the attic.
Audience questions/comments
Vita Natarajan, neighbor, asked how far back toward the beach will the house extent. She was informed that the house will be further back from the beach than the existing house. The beach is 9 feet west from the back porch.

Daniel C. Adams, of 1505 Oceanfront, informed the Board that the design of the proposed house is aesthetically pleasing, appropriate and reasonable for the property, and enhances the area. He is in support of this application.

Stephanie Gurgo, of 1503 Oceanfront, informed that Board that she thinks this house will be aesthetically pleasing and will be an asset to the neighborhood. She said the proposed house will be a far superior aesthetically pleasing house. She fully supports the proposal.

The Board determined that the applicant is constructing a beautiful home. The house will be a wonderful addition to the area, will be aesthetically pleasing, and will be an improvement to the housing stock of the Borough of Point Pleasant Beach. The Board determined that the house will be modest in size and that the lot can accommodate the height. The house does not create any massing.

The Board found the proposal challenging with 2 front yards and was pleased that the applicant was able to lessen the existing variances and provide the neighbors with better ocean views by moving the house back from the beach. The Board determined that the building coverage was greatly reduced by the removal of the garage. Although the applicant is still over in building coverage by 1% and still requires a variance, the Board feels it is de minimus.

Spader – Had a number application’s in the beach area; it is obviously going to be a beautiful home. I believe the consideration of going to 38 feet makes it better to be safe then sorry.
Kelly – This is a wonderful addition to that area. I think when this is over we will have a whole new housing stock in the beach.
Reynolds – I echo the fact it is a great presentation; it is a modest aesthetically pleasing home and the benefits way outweigh the negatives. In favor.
Ardito – Sorry for the applicant’s loss of the structure. You are still trying to get things back to where things need to be. The fact that it is a modest home is a big deal. The challenges with two front yards was presented well. All in all in favor.
Renner – Beautiful rendering; happy that you are moving back from the ocean.
Loder – Reduced building coverage and moved back from the ocean. In favor of this application
Davis – Very attractive flood compliant home. In favor
Chairman Reilly – Very well presented application, very clear not much to question. In favor

Motion by Mr. Loder, second by Mr. Kelly to approve application #2013-48 of Gail Connolly with conditions.
In favor: Spader, Kelly, Reynolds, Ardito, Renner, Loder and Chairman Reilly
Opposed: None
Application approved with conditions
Meeting adjourned at 9:28 pm
Attest: Karen L. Mills, Clerk of the Board

Published December20, 2013 | Board of Adjustment Minutes | 1748

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