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

January 28, 2014

Council Minutes

The Mayor & Council of the Borough of Point Pleasant Beach met at 6:34 PM with Mayor Barrella and Council Members Reid, Cortes, Vogel, Mayer, Gordon and Toohey present. The Deputy Municipal Clerk read the notice indicating compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act.

Motion by Councilman Vogel, to enter closed session to discuss access to Maryland Avenue Beach, potential Borough acquisition of property, contract negotiation for Shared Services and status of negotiations with TWU, was seconded by Councilman Cortes and carried by the following roll call vote. The Governing Body reserves its right to amend and supplement the purposes of executive session by motion at the public meeting.
VOTE: Council Members Reid, Cortes, Vogel, Mayer, Gordon, Toohey….YEA

Closed session started at 6:36 PM and ended at 7:12 PM.

Mayor Barrella called the regular meeting to order at 7:31 PM. Present were Council Members Reid, Cortes, Vogel, Mayer, Gordon and Toohey. The Deputy Municipal Clerk again read the notice indicating compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act.

A moment of silence was observed for long-time PPB educator Al Michigan.

Deputy Clerk Farrell explained revisions to the agenda since January 21st agenda was set: item 1/d was removed as it was not needed; 2/k was removed for separate consideration as Resolution 3 at the request of Councilman Mayer (Councilman Mayer: had discussion with Clerk Ellsworth Friday morning – she suggested that Mr. Wolfersberger’s resignation be added as a discussion item and item 2/k was set to consider separately; Mayor Barrella: asked if anyone had reviewed the December minutes, in response to his email, specifically the CDL discussion) not to Deputy Clerk’s knowledge (Mayor Barrella: he and Councilman Mayer had a disagreement over whether they had reached a compromise – he thought they had - thinks other people on Council thought they had – Councilman Mayer didn’t think they had reached a compromise, but that Mayor Barrella just unilaterally moved halfway away from his position in exchange for him staying exactly where he was – just wanted to make it clear – thought they had talked about a compromise on the record and Councilman Mayer disagrees – if they need to be corrected, let’s get them corrected).

Motion by Councilman Cortes, to approve January 7, 2014 Council meeting minutes, was seconded by Councilman Toohey and carried by roll call vote.
VOTE: Council Members Reid, Cortes, Vogel, Mayer, Toohey ….YEA
Councilman Gordon….Abstain

Anne Lightburn & Sal Pepe, Open Space Committee: presented views on Boardwalk rehabilitation at New Jersey Avenue bathhouse/concession stand.
Anne Lightburn: provided memo outlining and giving background on meetings with architectural firms that submitted proposals for repairing the bathhouse – one architect brought up issue of FEMA reimbursement if it’s not raised – BA/CFO researched and it does not have to be raised – all firms are capable of providing the architecturals – relatively small job, small footprint – replacing bathrooms and a relatively simple luncheonette-type thing – ranked architects on how easy it would be to work with them and how complete their proposals were – concerned about structural engineering aspect – Open Space recommends the Governing Body, Borough Engineer and/or BA/CFO have discussions with 2 or 3 of the firms – originally T&M was going to handle mechanicals (MEP), such as plumbing and electric, but not air conditioning and heating systems – so part of the discussion would be to get a cost estimate – it’s a specialized function that architectural firms may contract out – assumes T&M will do construction oversight – invited questions; Sal Pepe: don’t think mechanicals, electric and plumbing, are a big deal – only talking about some lines going into the restaurant area for cooking – suggested installing a gas line for minor cost – must decide where to put bathrooms – need a handicap bathroom – all architects were concerned about structure – a couple said they'd get underneath and look at the pilings and footings – concerns are about liability if they certify that it's okay – wanted to make sure we do structural engineering; Ms. Lightburn: feels more comfortable with one of the higher priced firms, because they are local and willing to go the extra mile, including extra meetings and looking at underside of the building; Mayor Barrella: asked if numbers provided were for architectural services (yes); Mr. Pepe: spoke about the fact that mechanicals were not included in original RFQ, how that should be handled and who should do the mechanical equipment work; Councilman Gordon: asked if FEMA would cover 90% of architectural services (BA/CFO: yes, as is part of the cost estimate); Ms. Lightburn: architectural firm provides some hours for supporting the bid process, in terms of reviewing and analyzing the contractors’ bids received – all want to look at the shop drawings from the construction firm to ensure they match what the architectural drawings state – they do site visits; Mayor Barrella: asked for a rough cost estimate; BA/CFO Riehl: FEMA did 2 comparative estimates – it had to meet the 50% rule – total estimate of replacement is $560K – total cost estimate of repairs is $230K, from the nails to the equipment – FEMA is allowing us to repair, without taking it down and raising it, as the repair cost is less than 50% of the replacement value cost – would contract it out and then apply for the 90% reimbursement; Mayor: asked what would happen if project cost came in at $400K; BA/CFO: if it comes in outside the scope of the budget FEMA approved, we have to ask for an amendment and they would come in and write that – it’s not a guarantee but don’t think Open Space was looking to send much more than the scope (right) – have put aside $350K in bond ordinance for repairs, which was for everything including soft costs of the construction - wouldn't want to go beyond the scope of that either; Mayor Barrella: asked if they are proposing what is already there – bath house, food service; Ms. Lightburn: yes, FEMA money is for repair, not a massive remodeling – envision a better traffic flow on public entrance, ADA bathrooms and maybe repositioning bathrooms, if it saves on construction costs – very minor changes; Mayor Barrella: so if the project came in at $300K and FEMA okayed the change, our cost would be $30K (yes); Councilman Gordon: asked if town liability would be Open Space dollars; BA/CFO: currently, part of general capital bond ordinance; Ms. Lightburn: can use Open Space funds, which generally support maintenance and development for Open Space and recreation; Mayor Barrella: asked about what appears to be a negative recommendation on the bathroom at the Inlet (Councilman Mayer: in the November report) so, you just don’t want to put a bathroom there like there is at the Inlet: Mr. Pepe: been a lot of talk about that – some don’t want to change anything – must meet new codes, no matter what – might suggest changing the entrance – repairs with minor changes – key item is to have an architect say the structure is good enough to repair – won’t know that without a structural engineering report; Mayor Barrella: asked, if we don't go through with the project, because it’s not cost effective, if we can submit the architect bill to FEMA and for 90% reimbursement; Ms. Lightburn: if we do this structural examination and they decide the building is good to go, we proceed – if it’s a showstopper, only pay for the hours it took to get to that, not the whole bill – that would be part of the contract – would not go forward with designs; Councilman Vogel: so, would ask them to check the structure first (yes) that’s why we had a comfort factor with Seabring as they emphasized that quite a bit; Councilman Reid: suggested that 3 architects speak to their contractors to submit costs for heating, ventilation, etc.; Mr. Pepe: don’t know if you can do that without conceptual drawing; Mayor Barrella: must first ensure it’s structurally sound; Ms. Lightburn: before contract is awarded, Engineer Savacool or BA/CFO Riehl must talk to these firms and let them know they need to do the MEP; Councilman Reid: recommended Buildings & Grounds Chair Cortes, BA/CFO and Borough Engineer meet with them to ensure they are on the same page; Ms. Lightburn: will be happy to move forward and resolve this; Councilman Mayer: thanked Open Space for their work – asked for an update on the cleanup underneath the building; BA/CFO Riehl: 8 were there yesterday and worked from about 8 o’clock to 2 o’clock, – scheduled to come back on the 3rd and 24th – DPW was there last Friday, cleaning debris from inside the building.

Mayor Barrella: directed that resignation of James Wolfersberger be added to Consent Resolution (2/l); Councilman Reid: suggested a letter thanking him for his services.

John Chiaia, Esq., representing White Sands Hotel: appearing for 3rd time – purpose tonight is to provide updates to information previously provided – provided current figures paid in Hotel/Motel Tax – can see progression over the years of less sales, which equates to less revenues to the town over the years – also requesting an amendment to ordinance dealing with location restriction of ABC license expansions – have pending application for Hotel/Motel Exception – hotel buildings are on the west and east side of Ocean Avenue with liquor license in the building on the west – can't currently expand east of Ocean Avenue, which is where their guests would like their resort experience – when that application was heard, discussion ensued about this becoming the 24th ABC license in town and if the town really wanted another license – question of what happens to the current White Sands license – if it will be sold, effectively adding to the number of operating licenses – discussion then went in the direction that perhaps there needs to be an exception to the ordinance for those who qualify for a Hotel/Motel License – distributed current ordinance with suggested amendment, “this subsection shall not apply to licenses presently existing that would also comply with the minimum quantity provision of Statute 33:1-12”, which is the Hotel/Motel Exception and which is 100 units – the White Sands has 130 [Mayor Barrella: Mr. Chiaia (owner) has expressed potential willingness to surrender the existing license in exchange for approval of Hotel/Motel License – asked if that was off the table] no – have a pending application – should Council decide to amend its ordinance, would press forward and that would still be on the table [Mayor: clarified that the White Sands is willing, in exchange for the approval of a Hotel/Motel license, to exchange and surrender its existing license – told Mr. Chiaia he can think about it; Councilman Reid: they’ve been having discussions with Attorney Gertner (yes) – will need to continue those discussions with new Borough Attorney when the time comes; Councilman Vogel: Governing Body took a stance with mini-bar request in the past – Governing Body should be educated about those discussions] yes, referenced minutes of May 7, 2002 meeting, at which the White Sands applied for an expansion of its license across the street to take in the pool and restaurant – that was 10 years ago, when there was no Hotel/Motel Tax – had 93% occupancy rate at that time – times have changed significantly – tax has gone from 7% sales tax to 18% – now there is an added $40/night tax with no extra value – would like to provide the expected full resort experience, cocktails at poolside (Mayor: argument is they should get this liquor license because they’re suffering due to the Hotel/Motel Tax) want to give guests more value for what they’re paying – paying extra, due to tax, but not getting anything extra – have seen occupancies go down – distributed comparison to Council (Councilman Gordon: is sympathetic – dilemma is that his solution to occupancy going down is the sale of more alcohol – recent history of PPB has been that alcohol is the resident evil, so to speak) Legislature has spoken by giving the Hotel/Motel Exception – there must be some added benefit for guests to drink at the hotel and not get in a car to leave (Councilman Gordon: puts a different dynamic in the neighborhood surrounding the motel – these are the pulls each of us has to debate within ourselves) Jenkinson’s is the main draw for their clientele – they appeal to children from toddler age to 12 – the lion’s share of guests are those parents – would anticipate those people to consume alcoholic beverages at the resort during the day – restaurant is open to the public (Councilman Gordon: changing the equation might attract a different clientele over time; Councilman Mayer: asked the status of their construction) east side construction exterior is complete – interior is in progress (Mayor Barrella: there were other issues – for example, there was a question as to the effect of our ordinance saying no license east on even the Hotel/Motel Exception – we do have that ordinance, no expansion east – can get a Hotel/Motel Exception, which would allow alcohol west of Ocean Avenue – there remains a question, with our ordinance, of whether it can be served east of Ocean Avenue – trying to dance around our ordinance and amend it in such a way alcohol to be served east of Ocean Avenue, even though we have an ordinance that says you can’t, when there may be no compelling reason within the State statute to allow it) it’s a pre-emption issue (Mayor Barrella: doesn’t know if the State is going to pre-empt – might not be big enough for the State to improperly interfere in a local decision – knows Mr. Chiaia has spent considerable time with Attorney Gertner discussing this) presented an update to Exhibit A3, an analysis of Hotel/Motel Taxes 2000-2013 – last one went through 2012 – Hurricane Sandy impacted sales this year more than anything – most people felt the Jersey Shore wasn’t ready there was decline in stays – most valuable illustration is the last column which shows steady decline in occupancy rate – 93.8% in summer 2000 to 59% last summer – explained the chart – paid over $78K in Hotel/Motel Tax to PPB last year – listening at the front desk to complaints from customers who want to be constructive, to make facility better for their vacation – if they were able to offer that full experience on the ocean side, guests would be drawn to stay longer than 2 or 3 days – might stay for a week like they used to – have the same customers, but they are not staying as long – giving them something extra will keep them longer – with higher occupancy rates, the town will experience more revenue from the tax [Mayor Barrella: in 2004, there was $94,525 paid in Hotel/Motel Tax (yes) and occupancy rate was 78.12% (yes) – in 2012, there was $94,795 in Hotel/Motel Tax paid (right) and occupancy was 70% (right) – so with 8% less occupancy, paid the same Hotel/Motel Tax – which means, with an 8% downturn in occupancy, gross receipts remained the same (yes); Councilman Gordon: that’s a 0% inflation rate – that’s an unfair comparison; Mayor Barrella: that’s reflective of higher room rates and could be the reason there’s a drop in occupancy; Councilman Gordon: that’s an inflationary cost too; Mayor Barrella: we’re in a post-2008 era – a recession, which we haven’t come out of yet – understands the problem – spoke to owner and asked him what was the most important and his answer was to have a restaurant overlooking the ocean –makes a lot of sense – not sure that amending our ordinance is the right way to go – would be more inclined to lean toward the surrender of the existing license or an exchange of the existing license for the Hotel/Motel License – that accomplishes the primary goal, pulls a license off the streets of PPB, while the Chiaia’s have an expanded opportunity to profit from their operations – that is a win-win – amending our ordinance is, essentially, a loss) requested Council take action at the next meeting, or let them know the ordinance will not be amended, so they can submit their response to the request to turn in the existing license – the corresponding element to that is not having to pay the town a bid price for the new license [Mayor Barrella: that would make sense; Councilman Mayer: expect to appoint new counsel at next meeting – asked him to wait until the second meeting in February – all are supportive of the business, it’s important to have a first-class hotel in town – it’s hard wherever the commercial zone meets the residential zone – have to give deference to the residential zone – prior concessions are still there – neighbors need to be taken into account too; Councilman Vogel: there are a lot of questions here – doesn't know about even 2 weeks – existing ordinance talks about motel license as well, there are no limitations – asked what will be opened up if Council allows this east of Ocean Avenue – there are other possible proposals for hotels east of Ocean Avenue – there are other existing hotels east of Ocean Avenue; Councilman Gordon: they don’t meet the state criteria for number of rooms, though; Councilman Vogel: state criteria is different than our municipal ordinance, it says 50 – doesn’t set a limit on the number of licenses – haven’t issued any – asked how many rooms the White Sands has east of Ocean Avenue (75) – once the door is opened, there is no going back – they’re nice people – but things change, new owners come in – what will be there with different vendors is a concern – question of what limitations can be set – public is allowed the restaurant – asked if public is allowed into the pool – important to know what restrictions are allowed, need to move slowly – saying two weeks, a month – not comfortable with that; Councilman Gordon: owe it to them to expedite this process, because it’s been ongoing for some time; Mayor Barrella: his question is, if they want to get this done for the summer, if they’re willing to exchange the licenses, put that in writing and let’s move on – if Council is unwilling to change the ordinance, then they’ll challenge whether the ordinance is valid or has been pre-empted by the State – make a decision and move forward – that’s something the Chiaia family should know whether they’re willing to do or not – if they’re willing to do that and it comes to a tie vote, is not sure he wouldn’t cast an affirmative vote but, if it comes to amending the ordinance, he’s not sure that that’s something that he can support).


Councilman Reid: announced that here would be a ring ceremony for the PPB High School football team at 5:30 pm in the gym on February 8th – Mayor and Council have been invited; will be followed by Chamber installation dinner at 6:30PM; JCP&L has been talking about tree trimming – met with head forester for JCP&L along with 3 members of the Shade Tree Commission – great give and take – JCP&L was considerate of Shade Tree Commission members – provided his contact information along with that of the company performing the work – working on funding for tree planting in spring – spoke to head of JCP&L about lack of good public relations in Ocean & Monmouth Counties – would be good if they donated some trees – also working with some businesses in town about donating trees.

Councilman Cortes: no report – was on vacation – will have detailed report next meeting.

Councilman Vogel: met with executive leadership of Police Department to reconnect and acquaint himself with their issues and concerns – identified some hi-level issues – had healthy discussion about things Council could do to benefit all departments – Police continue to do a fantastic job – talked about working together cooperatively with taxi license – looking at ordinance, as there are a few concerns – time frame for seasonal ordinances was not in the existing structure – looking at number of licenses to make sure that there are sufficient resources to get people in and out – also, making sure there is a strategy in place to handle the existing taxi stand on Ocean Avenue, communicating with businesses to can make sure it’s done in an safe, orderly fashion that benefits both the businesses and quality of life for residents – parking on lawn ordinance is being discussed with Code Department, coordinating with Councilman Toohey’s committee to ensure everyone has the information they need to effectively enforce that ordinance; recreation committee is working hard and in need of members – any interested volunteers should submit letter to Council – can also volunteer without being on the Committee – could use extra hands, as they are trying to stretch limited resources as far as possible and have some ambitious goals – asked for Governing Body feedback as to what Council would like the Recreation Committee to do – can e-mail Chairman Glen Paesano with thoughts on activities or events – there is a need for background checks with the amount of volunteers for recreation basketball and park program – background check ordinance is being reviewed – also in contact with Vince Cicalese from Little League and Dr. Savage from the Board of Education to see what they do – continuing to work through that process to make sure children are safe and everything is done in a cost effective manner; asked Councilman Reid to facilitate getting trash and recycling cans at Blodgett and St. Louis Avenues for use by the many ice skaters utilizing Lake of the Lillies in its frozen state.

Councilman Mayer: Finance Committee met briefly tonight before the Council meeting – asked BA/CFO Riehl to have initial draft budget ready for Committee review at its meeting next Tuesday – Annual Debt Statement was filed today – Annual Financial Statement is due February 10th.

Councilman Gordon: no report; announced that PPB Music Parents Association is presenting nationally-touring “Beatlemania” show on February 1st at 7PM, to raise money for band uniforms – $30/ticket – students can buy one, get one free – VIP section tickets cost more.

Councilman Toohey: met with CO Gardner, CO Petrillo and Councilman Cortes – discussed a number of issues including ‘story’ and ‘front lawn parking’ ordinances; moved up in national flood rating system, thanks to Mr. Gardner’s hard work – went from a 9 to an 8, which gives PPB residents a 10% break on flood insurance; reviewed ordinance which defines a driveway – relatively straightforward – however, enforcement is not because a number of properties are without delineated driveways – anticipate recommending a delineated driveway requirement added to new COs giving some guidance to enforce this ordinance – doesn’t clean-up everything, but will clean-up, for enforcement purposes, properties with new owners and seasonal rentals; confirmed with Mr. Gardner that ‘story’ ordinance does not ease the height restriction – to exceed the height restriction in affected zones, one would still need to apply for a variance; talked about ‘FastTrackGov’ computer program which they are utilizing – looking across departments about the need for archiving – looking at doing it digitally and sharing costs across departments; met with Environmental Commission – called attention to ‘Smoker’s Post’ in room – would like to see it go in front of “Green Planet” to cut down on some of the waste; committed to meeting with DEP on dunes project – important to communicate scope and time-line of project to residents – will not start in PPB until September at the earliest – will move from south to north – 2 sets of plans for PPB, one for section north of New Jersey Avenue, which has an 18-foot crest at the dune, which is 65-feet-wide – when you get to the south end, it will transition to a 22-foot crest and the south end will have an additional 175 feet of beach in front – that’s the construction template, what they are initially going to build – there’s a mark beyond that initial beach building that will be replenished – there is both a construction plan and replenishment with attendant costs – there will be no cost sharing of the construction phase of the project, as it will be totally covered through State funds – however, in the 4 or 5 years to follow, the expectation is that the municipality will be on the hook for 25% of any replenishment projects – not a small amount of money – Governing Body needs to be cognizant of that – happy to hear that one of his biggest concerns about this project is actually one of the DEP’s biggest concerns – Ocean County long shore current goes predominately from south to north – dumping 10 million cubic meters of sand south of the Manasquan Inlet – they’ve recommended that the Governing Body draft a letter to the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) to alert them that it’s going to end up here – need to see if we can get a commitment from ACOE to continually dredge Inlet – will be a navigational hazard – not necessarily the mouth of the Inlet that’s the biggest concern, but the stretch between the south jetty and the mile marker that is anticipated to shoal – the other issue with the plan is the outflow structure – the Borough Engineer was at the meeting with me – if anyone’s familiar with the outflow structure at the south end of town, it looks like a pill box – right now, it sits roughly in the middle of the beach – neither were satisfied with ACOE's plans for that structure – putting dune and extra beach in front of that structure and it’s never going to make it to the ocean – going to flood north and south, which it already does – recommendation was for our engineering firm to draft a wish list – would like to communicate more with the Borough Engineer about this – reiterated that 2 major problems from an engineering standpoint are the Inlet shoaling and outflow structure – dunes will be a major issue facing this town – important that the Governing Body get out in front of it, from both a financial and engineering standpoint.

Mayor Barrella: both Councilman Reid and Mayer indicated there’ll be some new borough professionals in place – explained why it’s taking until February to appoint, along with the process, that these are Mayoral appointments with Council consent – if Council does not consent, then Council appoints whoever they wish to appoint – met with Councilmen Reid and Mayer in the hopes of coming to consensus, but that was not in the cards – so, at the next Council meeting, the call will be solely theirs – await to see what will be done and will wait to comment at that time – by and large, our Borough professionals have served us very well – hopes whatever is done does not cause duplicative efforts – doesn’t make sense to bring someone new in to work on something that someone else has already been working on – that’s again, a Council decision; been an eventful 3 weeks in NJ – NJ (“Bridgegate”) was the #1 story in Florida, when he was there – sad commentary that those trusted with those responsibilities would do something like that, as emails have revealed – PPB has also experienced that type of pressure, influence, impropriety and interference in our matters in spring/summer 2012 – it is, apparently, the MO of the administration – we’ll see how deep it truly runs.

Business Administrator/Chief Financial Officer Riehl: No report

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (Agenda Items and Ordinances on First Reading)

Mayor Barrella stepped out 8:51PM, turning control of the meeting over to Council President Mayer, and returned 8:52PM.
Dave Cavagnaro, Point Pleasant Beach (PPB): complemented DPW on clearing snow and collecting garbage and recycling in frigid temperatures; asked if Council has decided on bathhouse/concession property and if public could get copy of Open Space Committee report; asked Councilman Toohey about delineated driveways – curb cut doesn't make a legal driveway; asked if any changes had been made to the ‘story’ ordinance; asked about court applicant in item 1/y – heard that someone complained of coming to Borough Hall with an application and there was no one here to take it – is familiar with Borough Hall – there are 5 or 6 people on the one side and 2 or 3 on the other and someone’s always there willing to help the public – spoke with the Borough Administrator and it turns out Council wasn't given complete information – that person didn't go to Borough Hall, but to the Court in Point Pleasant – if his information is correct, that person was actually late – for those in the audience who might have gotten the impression that people working downstairs are either hiding, going out for long breaks or just not willing to help, that’s just not the case.
Chuck Venedam, PPB: spoke about ‘story’ ordinance and how it might affect elimination of parking spaces in the town – personally experienced devastation from Sandy – some owners are taking advantage of Sandy to raise their houses – they knew there was no parking when they purchased their houses – people are going for variances to raise houses to 14' to build garages underneath – no one on Brunswick Place can raise their house and depend on on-street parking – has lived here for 30 years – parking is golden – several other homes on Ocean Avenue and around town are going for variances, which will eliminate even more on-street parking – no problem parking in off-season, but doing rent-a-spot during summer – there are 56 homes on Ocean Avenue between Brunswick Place and Water Street – 45 have no off-street parking – 25 spots, between Homestead Avenue and Water Street, for those 45 homes – heard at Planning Board meeting that granting these people a curb cut was going to save a spot on the street – rationale is that parking 2 cars in garage will save one spot on the street – disagrees – it’s like musical chairs with cars and parking spots in summer – if they are granted the garage and curb cut, in summer they will move those 2 cars onto the street, saving those garage spots for company – will lose spot to curb cut and those other 2 – would like something added to the ordinance that, if owners knew there was no parking when they bought their houses and they’re raising the houses now, they be denied curb cuts to stop eliminating parking spaces – other problem is that Off Shore patrons don’t all park in their lot – asked Council to consider, anytime these ordinances or curb cuts comes up, that they eliminate precious parking spots.
Vince Castin, PPB: asked Councilman Toohey about dune situation – if they will go up into the business area; asked if buildings will count as a dune; asked Councilman Reid about lake plans.
John Colvin, PPB: addressed Councilman Toohey's suggestion about new COs and delineated driveways – people can’t occupy their ground levels due to FEMA situations and are raising their houses with a driveway and parking being paramount – his house was raised in 2007 and has garages under there – had no problem with the hurricane – taking 2 cars off the street and putting them under a house saves a spot, even with a curb cut off-street parking – that needs to be considered – if the masses of dwellings going up in this town can add parking off-street to a dwelling that currently does not have even a driveway, that’s something to consider – house across the street has no driveway – resident parks on the lawn – the only car in the street, this past snow storm belongs to the guy who didn’t park on his front lawn and it wreaked havoc with the plowing – street is still a mess because one car didn’t move off the street – so, raising houses and putting two cars under there is taking cars off the street, leading to better street maintenance – water can't drain off Trenton Avenue because the snow is 5 feet from the curb – there are already flooding issues on the street.
Vin Curtin, PPB: what this gentleman just said may be true on Trenton Avenue – have to know the District 4 area in summertime where home has been for 25 years – bought it knowing there’s no parking – Mr. Venedam provided statistics for that area – very tough in that area, especially with the restaurant, for residents that need to park on the street, who don’t have driveways – about 15 years ago, on Ocean Avenue, from Arnold Avenue to Broadway and intersecting streets, had about 70-80 parking spots – over time, parking has been limited – could get 3 cars between the lines, that’s been reduced – been a lot of yellow areas on the corners where you can’t park at all – been renting a spot – different circumstance on Trenton Avenue than Ocean during summer – concerned that spots are lost with every curb cut – suggested every time curb cut is approved, should give back one of the spots that used to exist – desperate down there for those 2 months – could be opening the door to make a real parking problem worse, at least in his area – responded to Councilman Reid’s question about renting parking spots that are in private driveways and go from $1K to $1.2K – knew, when he bought his home, he’d have to walk or rent a spot, but it was worth it to be in PPB.
John Jackson, attorney on behalf of Pete & Donna Spector: spoke on item 2/i, curb cut at 209 Ocean Avenue – addressed prior comments and spoke to balance of competing interests with allowing people who have the ability to raise their houses and secure a parking spaces in the driveway and under their houses – poor balance of priorities to tell homeowners they can't take their cars off the street and build garages and driveways which, in his clients’ case, will allow for 3-car parking, 2 in the garage and 1 in the street where none previously existed, because someone else, who lives a block away, wants to park there – objectors would do the same to their homes if they could, but since they can’t are objecting to anyone else who wants a curb cut – clients went to the Board of Adjustment (BOA) where this gentleman also objected – BOA considered all and told clients to move the house back 10 more feet from the curb to allow a little for line of sight when pulling in and out, and would allow a car to park in the driveway, as well as having parking for 2 cars underneath – based on BOA request, clients adopted that design – obtained Ocean County-issued curb cut permit for his client, which was reviewed by County engineers – asked Council to consider that there are 2 sides to this – there’s also a security issue to be able to get a car off the street, and it aids with snow plowing – if every house in PPB could pick up 3 spots, like his clients, parking problems would be a lot better – asked that Council consider that in the context of the story ordinance – there are a lot of impositions with strangers, the public and people from around the block to be able to park in front of one’s house; been part of the American and PPB culture that if a house can allow for a parking space in a driveway, you can get it – greater good of town is advanced when homeowners are encouraged to meet the residential site improvement standards and provide adequate on-street parking, which is the public policy of the State of NJ – so, by saying you can’t allow an off-street parking space, you’re actually contravening State – 2 sides to the issue – in case of his client, if he goes out or to work on the weekend, must park in the public lot – going to have to realize that not only does there house not allow parking, their community doesn’t allow parking and when you park on a private lane you – BOA doesn’t approve the curb cut but, in this instance, it’s on a County roadway and County of Ocean has already issued permit to allow must to come before Council – BOA was satisfied with the configuration and made the recommendation that clients move the house back 10 feet to pick up a driveway parking space, along with the 2 under-house parking spaces – whenever homeowners can park 3 cars on their property, that is for the greater good because you are only going to potentially eliminate 1 parking space – represent another client on Baltimore who was able to reconfigure the parking spaces so no on-street parking is being lost due to the curb cut – when you pick up 3 spaces for a loss of 1, it’s a net gain and better for everyone.
Donna Spector, PPB: performed certain actions on house as per BOA resolution – BOA required Governing Body permission for curb cut – were advised it was a County road and they needed permit from County – got that permit in September and their building permits on November 13th – proceeded to move their house back, spending tens of thousands of extra dollars, based on the fact that they had this County permit.
Chuck Venedam, PPB: lives on Ocean Avenue and can raise his house, but won't do that to neighbors – not right to take parking away from them – bought his house and neighbors on lane bought their homes knowing that they don’t have parking available – spoke to County Engineer – he can get a County permit, but still needs Council approval – they also need the County permit because it's a County road.
Lee Kelly, PPB: has been at every BOA meeting this year – BOA doesn't approve curb cuts – they caution people and tell them if they're going to build a garage, they will need a curb cut, but may not get one – have denied many garages on Ocean Avenue because there are no set-backs – recalls Mrs. Spector agreed to move the house back, but there was no assurance that they would get a curb cut.
Motion by Councilman Reid, to close public participation, was seconded by Councilman Cortes and carried by roll call vote.
VOTE: Council Members Reid, Cortes, Vogel, Mayer, Gordon, Toohey….YEA

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (Agenda Items and Ordinances on First Reading)

The Mayor directed that Item 2/i be considered separately as Resolution 4; Councilman Mayer: asked BA/CFO about her recommendation on 2j (to deny) – Mayor Barrella asked that item be changed to denial of request.
Motion by Councilman Mayer, to adopt resolutions listed below, was seconded by Councilman Reid and carried by roll call vote.
a) Appointments to Local Emergency Planning Council for 2014
b) Establishment of meeting dates for Local Emergency Planning Council for 2014
c) Correction to 6/25/13 Minutes - Resolution 1/G should refer to building sub-code official
d) Removed from the agenda before the meeting
e) Correction to 12/03/13 Minutes – Resolution 3/G which was missing should read “P O to
F&C Automotive for DPW system parts ($2,595)”
f) Payrolls #26A ($129.52) and #1 ($249,921.18)
g) Payment Cert #1 to Johnson Baran for Roadway Improvements ($98,980.66)
h) Change Order #1 to Johnson Baran for Roadway Improvements ($10,003.44)
i) PO to Morotola for police mobile radios ($10,334.25)
j) PO to Coastal Cleaning Services for floor maintenance in municipal building ($5,100)
k) Banner Permit Appl for Columbus Day Parade banner on Rte 35S, 9/12/14-9/30/14
l) PO to Devo & Assoc for parking meter equipment ($5,258)
m) Payment of insurance opt outs for the second half of 2013 ($10,650.28)
n) Amendment to Resolution 2014-0101/2W-5, to include appointments of Joseph
Nepomuceno & Kevin Nickerson as Class II Officers (appointed 12/3, but left off 1/1
resolution, due to typo)
o) ABC Social Affairs permit appl. for Chamber of Commerce “Beer on the Boards” on 3/22/14
p) Payment to Mark Woszcak for water main leak and hydrant replacement ($10,681.26)
q) Payment to Pitney Bowes for pre-paid postage ($4,000)
r) Payment to PPB Bd of Ed for February allocation ($916,131)
s) Payment to Surfside Electric for repairs to 10 poles on Arnold Ave ($3,200)
t) Payment OCJIF of 1st installment on insurance policies ($218,046.90)
u) Payment to Brick MUA for bulk water usage ($47,870.83)
v) Payment to T&M Associates from Developer Escrow Account ($55)
w) Payment to Madeline Russell for employee sick leave benefits ($15,000)
x) Payment to Bird Construction for Pymt Certs 5 & 6 for Bdwlk Reconstruction ($74,575.71)
y) Appointment of Tylah Coppotelli as temporary P/T clerk in the Court office
z) P O to Pierce Manufacturing for fire truck ($430,581.13)
a) Approval of computer-generated vouchers ($1,363,845.54)
b) Approval of Schedule C Agreement with County
c) Award of contract to Earle Asphalt for Boston Ave Imp., upon attorney review ($258,513.13)
d) Special Event Application and request for S/E fee waiver for St. Peter School 5K on 3/29/14
e) Special Event Application for Kidney & Urology Foundation walk on 5/4/14
f) Special Event Application for Cystic Fibrosis Foundation walk on 5/18/14
g) Special Event Application for PPB Little League parade 4/5/14
h) Special Event Application for First Aid & Emergency Squad Monster Dash on 10/25/14
i) Removed for separate consideration as Resolution 4
j) Deny request for Water/Sewer relief at 5 Water Street
k) Removed for separate consideration as Resolution 3
l) Accept resignation of James Wolfersberger from the BOA
VOTE: Council Members Reid, Cortes, Vogel (all except items 1/c, 1/e, 1/z and 2/h) Mayer,
Gordon, Toohey (all except items 1/c and 1/e)…..YEA
Council Members Vogel* (only items 1/c, 1/e, 1/z and 2/h) and Toohey** (only items
1/C and 1/E)…..Abstain
*Councilman Vogel: wasn’t on Council during meetings in 1/c and 1/e – others due to an abundance of caution as a volunteer (Mayor Barrella: have carved those conflict items into separate resolutions for Councilman Mayer in the past).
**Councilman Toohey: wasn’t on Council during meetings in 1/c and 1/e either

Mayor Barrella asked that Resolution 4 be considered next.

RESOLUTION 4 (Request for curb cut at 209 Ocean Avenue) was considered.
Motion by Councilman Reid, to approve curb cut request for 209 Ocean Avenue, was seconded by Councilman Toohey, and carried by roll call vote.
Councilman Gordon: thinks their intentions were good and they were led astray in a lot of regards through no fault of their own – future curb cuts, especially in these high density areas must be scrutinized individually – faulty argument that we’re taking cars off the street because there are vultures circling on a continuous basis to grab on-street parking spaces and the most likelihood is that they are not homeowners – for future reference, Council needs to preserve this town’s parking the way it has been and it’s very dangerous to establish precedent for allowing all these homes that are being raised to put driveways in – setting ourselves up for a big failure; Councilman Vogel: Council should look at the existing driveway ordinance because there is certain performance criteria with setbacks from neighboring driveways – looking at the survey, it’s a 25-foot lot – maybe they’re reaping the benefit of being the first one on the street – looking at the recommendation from Code Enforcement, there was no exception to existing ordinance with setbacks from neighboring driveways and street-ends – so there will be some limitations, due to the lot size down there and the ability to put in curb cuts – agrees with Councilman Gordon that Council should be vigilant but thinks that, with all the different roads and existing driveways, there is a limitation to how many more curb cuts can be granted in that area.
VOTE: Council Members Reid, Cortes, Vogel, Mayer, Gordon, Toohey…..YEA

RESOLUTION 3 (Replacement appointment to BOA) was considered. Mayor Barrella explained the genesis of resolution – received a call just before the last Council meeting from BOA Clerk indicating that Jim Wolfersberger had resigned – first alternate was Pete Renner – told BOA Clerk that would move Pete up to take vacant spots, with all other alternates moving up accordingly, creating a vacancy in the 4th alternate spot – will open it up to Council because what we’ve now got is a replacement appointment to BOA that doesn’t say anything (Council-man Mayer: Clerk suggested taking name off agenda so as not to embarrass anyone – this resolution was added by the Mayor to the 1/21 agenda – Council first saw it on the Friday night – before that meeting – looking at the Borough code and statute for authorization found that, in case of resignation, appointment comes from Council – BOA has 7 members and 4 alternates – currently have 6 members and 4 alternates – understands Mr. Shamy may resign too, leaving 3 alternates) clarified that next BOA meeting was February 5th and Council wouldn’t appoint until February 4th, which appointee may or may not be a current member of the BOA) wouldn’t be an existing member – no point, as you need to fill empty seats (Mayor Barrella: was told by the BOA Clerk about the resignation and asked to move the first alternate up to fill the vacancy – no brainer – when it happened in 2010/2011 the first alternate was Jay Reynolds, who was moved up the permanent position – doesn’t understand the need to wait and why moving people up – if talking about the issue of who becomes the 4th alternate, then maybe he agrees on the ordinance – doesn’t understand why Council would reach outside of and not appoint the 1st alternate, who’s been attending these meetings; Councilman Gordon: intention is to appointment somebody to complete to Mr. Wolfersberger’s permanent position) yes, to complete the term of Mr. Wolfersberger [Councilman Gordon: asked if appointment is outside the realm of any of these alternates (yes, to bring the Board back to its full strength) asked why they wouldn’t appoint someone as an alternate so they could get that experience, so the alternates can move up, because they’ve been doing it for some time] Mr. Wolfersberger’s seat is open for his term – procedure is for Council to appoint to fill Mr. Wolfersberger’s term (Councilman Gordon: let’s assume that’s correct, logic would dictate that you would appoint somebody who has experience as an alternate and move them up) in some cases, logic would dictate that, not in all (Councilman Gordon: this has all the earmarks of a political payback and that scares him, because these are very important positions – suggested, if they want to make a political appointment, make them that alternate so they can learn the job, in order to service this town in the best way possible – that is common sense) had several names presented to him - invited recommendations from the public.
No action was taken on resolution 3.

Ordinance 2014-01 (Repeal Ordinances 2013-47 thru 2013-50) was considered on second reading. Mayor Barrella opened the hearing to the public.
Councilman Gordon stepped out or the room at 9:46PM and returned at 9:48PM.
Dave Cavagnaro, PPB: asked about the protocol of grouping several ordinances together – never saw it done that way before (Attorney Gannon: no legal impediment to doing it this way) asked Councilman Vogel why he abstained on ordinance introduction (personal conflict – abundance of caution; Mayor Barrella: Councilman Mayer would recuse himself with respect to Ashbritt because his firm represented Ashbritt – elected to do the people’s business – personal conflict, without articulating it, doesn’t give the people any idea of why you’re not doing their business –should be articulating a reason; Councilman Vogel: believes there’s a conflict, so is avoiding it – he’s abstaining) most concerned about the special event ordinance – understands this change was to bring the Boardwalk into compliance, because all these years they haven’t been – if the concern of Council was the fee schedule, as Councilman Reid said last meeting, Council should simply amend the fee schedule instead of dumping the entire ordinance – although, right under the fee schedule is a clause that allows Council to waive the fees at their discretion – concerned that by dumping the entire audience, those who complied will continue to comply and the Boardwalk businesses who haven’t will continue not to, and then the cost of DPW and Police will continue to fall on the taxpayers rather than on the businesses – it’s not a question of whether the events they hold are good or bad, but who’s picking up the tab of the Police and DPW involved (Mayor Barrella: Jenkinson’s acknowledges that some of their events fall into a special events category – their principal objection has been to filing a separate application for each event – there is a real possibility of working out a bulk application with a discounted payment which basically helps fund the problem – the Chief has done an analysis and met with Mr. McGlynn – the irony of this is, when Councilman Corbally first brought this up, Councilman Mayer’s objection was the ordinance was in two different places and nobody knew which would control, so what we’ve done here is unify it and now that’s being repealed; Councilman Mayer: not a lot of attention was paid to this ordinance until the end of last Council's term – didn’t witness any discussions – I have questions and questions have been raised to me how it affects other non-profits – questions about knowing what they have to do and asking for dispensation – just don’t think it was done well; Mayor Barrella: ordinance was in the works and had been presented, probably, pre-Sandy – with all that went on with ‘Sandy’ it got pushed aside – not something that was just created) been a year in the works (Mayor Barrella: doesn’t understand about the exemption – anyone who wants to do something in town, from American Cancer Society to Little League, submits an application – this Council had a policy in the past of waiving for local charities – Councilman Reid expressed concern of its impact on future charitable events – Council has always been gracious in waiving that – would anticipate that they would continue to be – this is not aimed at penalizing charities and it’s disingenuous for anybody up here to suggest that; Councilman Mayer: it’s not aimed at it, it’s inadvertents; Councilman Reid: didn’t like the way these ordinances came up in November/December real quick and ‘let’s get it done now’ – we will revisit this – don’t agree with the ordinance as it’s written; Mayor Barrella: why not amend it instead of repealing it; Councilman Reid: will look at it later; Mayor Barrella: before or after this summer).
John Dixon, PPB: idea behind special event fee is to recoup cost to town for Police & DPW services – 98% of events that currently get permits use public land – Jenkinsons and other Boardwalk s events are on private property – during his term on Council and before the fee increase, parking meters in Silver Lake lot brought in $1500-$3K or more during fireworks (Councilman Vogel left the room at 9:57 pm and returned at 10:00 pm) everyone talks about how much these events cost the taxpayers – not costing the taxpayers a dime because the parking fees more than cover the cost of special officers – it’s making money, not costing the town anything – Jenkinson’s was also picking up the garbage on the Boardwalk from the town cans so that wasn’t costing the town anything – no streets are blocked off – you say you want to keep this a family friendly town – Easter Egg Hunt fills that lot – town makes money off of that – it’s on the beach, not public land – town’s not losing any money, not costing the taxpayers a dime – same with concert at the Inlet and fireworks – these are all family events makes money off of them and they are family events – not saying Jenkinsons will stop these events because these events bring in revenue for them, but you’re taking a chance that Jenkinsons won't hold these events anymore and the town’s going to end up losing a lot of revenue (Mayor Barrella: have spoken to Mr. McGlynn about this and he understands that there are special events that do increase costs to the town – Chief has spoken with him and provided some numbers – rather than amending and putting in a section that provides for a bulk application with a flat fee and working with them and arriving at what the proper figure should be and the proper number of events within the application, which is not hard, because we’re not far apart really, this Council is just going to toss the whole thing out) don’t know if that’s what’s going to happen or not – but if there’s an agreement Council can get with them, that’s fine – the town makes 3 or 4 times more every time these events happen.
Motion by Councilman Reid, to close the public hearing, was seconded by Councilman Cortes and carried by roll call vote.
VOTE: Council Members Reid, Cortes, Mayer, Gordon, Toohey….YEA
Councilman Vogel…. No Vote, as he had stepped out for a moment
Mayor Barrella: read in the minutes, Councilman Toohey’s comments that ‘it’s pretty clear, sitting in the audience, that the Nepotism Ordinance was politically motivated’ – the word nepotism has been bandied about with this ordinance, it’s actually a limitation or a prohibition on employment – ‘was an overreach and also flies in the face of a free and open process’ – asked Councilman Toohey what he meant by ‘free and open process ‘ (Councilman Toohey: meaning that anyone who would like to serve our municipality as a professional in response to an RFP – by barring individuals from response to an RFP, barring them from unemployment, you’re unfairly limiting qualified professionals from serving the municipality – additionally, if you look at the RFPs, you’re limiting some of the most fiscally responsible choices from serving the municipality) essentially, the only change that was made was to include in the definition of those people who could not work for PPB and charge PPB were those people who were duly elected to represent the people of PPB – you talk about a free and open process, you’ve got 2 law firms, maybe 3, in the entire County who dominate – that’s why small lawyers, like some in our town, have difficulty making their practices work – in Ocean County, one firm that is the municipal prosecutor for 16 of Ocean County’s 33 municipalities – where’s the fair and open process there – can argue this differently, but there is no one around who can do tax appeal work better than I can – if I put in an RFP to represent the Borough to do its tax appeal work, people would look like I’m crazy – well, it’s the same thing for an elected Senator representing the people of PPB, (Councilman Toohey: respectfully disagreed – one’s sole responsibility as an elected official in PPB is to represent the people of PPB – that’s not the case for a sitting County or State level official – decisions they make in Trenton may fly in the face of the interests of PPB – it’s comparing apples to oranges) asked where’s the benefit to the town by doing this (Councilman Toohey: barring some of the most qualified candidates – the gentleman who served in 16 municipalities in Ocean County, is one of the most qualified Municipal Prosecutors in the State of New Jersey) and it would be nice if he ever showed up, but he never does, which is why he was fired in the first place – in 2011 complaints from the court and the Police Department caused him to seriously consider not reappointing that particular firm – it was at Mr. Mayer’s request that he give them another chance – he sat with Mr. Zabarsky and Mr. Zabarsky assured he would be the person coming in 2012 – and in 2012, Mr. Zabarsky didn’t show up and continued to send new associates – so there is no benefit to PPB – you’ve got an Assemblymen that represents this district working for another firm – given what’s going on in Trenton, now does not seem to me to be the time to start weakening ethics ordinances – now would seem to be the time for us to take the lead in strengthening these things – in terms of politics, he wants to look at, and wants Council to look at what is the replacement for what was the original nepotism ordinance –– there’s a statement in B3 of the existing ordinance that provides ‘this prohibition shall also apply to direct employees of any governing body member who has been employed within one year of the proposed hiring by the governing body’ – what that meant, is that if somebody worked for yourself, Councilman Mayer, they would not be eligible to now work for the town – asked how is that nepotism under your definition (Councilman Toohey: nepotism, as defined in the dictionary, is awarding jobs to relatives –guess it’s not) guess it’s not and, this was a lame duck provision – asked Councilman Vogel to shed some light as to why that particular sentence was put into the ordinance (Councilman Vogel: good government) because, at the time, it was thought that incoming Council President, Mike DiCicco, was going to appoint an employee of Mike Corbally’s firm to take the place of Jim Lacey as our Borough Administrator and there was some concern about that – and then Mayor Vogel made the statement, ‘don’t worry about it we’ve added a sentence’ – you want to talk about politics – you should get some institutional history first – that was a lame duck, you’re leaving it in place – you guys do what you want to do, we all know what’s going on.
Motion by Councilman Reid, to adopt Ordinance 2014-01 was seconded by Councilman Toohey and carried by roll call vote.
VOTE: Council Members Reid, Cortes, Mayer, Toohey….YEA
Councilman Vogel….Abstain
Councilman Gordon….NAY
Mayor Barrella: everyone is aware this ordinance does not take effect for 10 days (yes).

Ordinance 2014-02 (Amendment to Nepotism Ordinance) was considered on second reading. Public hearing was opened and held with no member of the public wishing to be heard.
Mayor Barrella: this ordinance was passed in 2005 likely in response to then Mayor Vogel’s sentence in 2004 – it’s been on the books and it’s worked, though – they’ve both been on the books and they’ve both worked – again, now’s not the time to weaken ethics, now’s the time to strengthen it.
Motion by Councilman Reid, to close the public hearing and adopt Ordinance 2014-02 was seconded by Councilman Cortes and carried by roll call vote.
VOTE: Council Members Reid, Cortes, Mayer, Toohey….YEA
Councilman Vogel….Abstain
Councilman Gordon….NAY

Ordinance 2014-03 (Meeting Procedures) was considered on second reading. Public hearing was opened and held with no member of the public wishing to be heard.
Councilman Gordon: asked what the amendment was; Councilman Mayer: it really reinstates the prior ordinance – Council adopted a protocol policy by resolution – this will allow that protocol policy to continue in effect without re-adopting a resolution every year – the ordinance was repealed – rather than repealing the repeal, Council would re-adopt the ordinance; Mayor Barrella: asked if the process was discussed with the Borough Attorney; Councilman Mayer: don’t know if I discussed it expressly with the Borough Attorney – talk with him from time to time.
Motion by Councilman Reid, to close the public hearing and adopt Ordinance 2014-03 was seconded by Councilman Vogel and carried by roll call vote.
VOTE: Council Members Reid, Cortes, Vogel, Mayer, Gordon, Toohey….YEA
Mayor Barrella: asked if Council had a meeting protocol (Councilman Mayer: it was adopted at the last meeting by resolution) that was the one we were going to discuss.

Ordinance 2014-06 (Amend Zoning Ordinance - Definition of Story) was introduced on first reading.
Councilman Gordon: asked Councilman Cortes if he got feedback from Boards while attending the meetings (Councilman Cortes: at January 8th meeting, they had some concerns about the height – tried to impress upon them that this ordinance just redefines the definition of story – there’s still a 35-foot height – there were some other concerns about aesthetics – Attorney Galvin said if Council adopts on first reading, will go to Planning Board anyway on February 5th) wonders what their feedback was (Mayor Barrella: not exactly accurate in terms of the height because, with the State rule in place, somebody could be above town’s 35 feet – if that’s the only issue, there’s the possibility that this is not a problem; Councilman Cortes: one of the Board members said that you can build 3,4,5 stories, you’re exaggerating, and stay under 35 feet – all for it – they didn’t have a problem with changing the definition of story – can go to 38.5 feet on a raise) limiting this to people just in a flood zone – so, as the flood zone meanders, could have one house in a flood zone and your next door neighbor doesn’t get to do the same exact thing (Councilman Cortes: if he didn’t live in a flood zone, he wouldn’t spend the extra $60K, $70K or $100K to raise his house) Councilman Gordon: but if you want to build a garage [Mayor Barrella: when he last spoke with the Borough Engineer, there was on variance that would have gone away had this ordinance been passed – there may be half a dozen or so people who may be waiting to see what’s going on – going to do a carte blanche for fewer than a dozen people – when we don't know what the effect might be overall – having people come to the Board of Adjustment (BOA) ensures against modulars –there’s some element of design there – sometimes the BOA is able to say if you want to do this, you have to make this improvement to the property –being able to do it on an automatic basis troubles him – BOA allowing people to do it and most of the applications, save one, have had other items as part of it –asked Councilman Vogel if this was the ordinance he was referring to in his September letter (yes) – understands the concern for one person or half a dozen people, but there is much more work that needs to be done to help alleviate the strain on families – this is an easy first step – don’t know, down the road, what the effect of this is going to be and since there’s no real defined group, why take the risk; Councilman Vogel: his rationale is these homes are already being built – at 114 Trenton, his neighbor has a 16-foot ceiling in his garage – wouldn’t change the size of the house at all if he could continue his first floor on that space to get a little more living space – might get homes that are a little less boxy – there's a trade-off – people in the flood zones are going to have to decide – we have this maximum amount of height to work with, do we want to put our cars off the street, do we want storaage space, do we want habitable attic space – will have a give and take on that – perfect example of this is the property located at 315 Carter Avenue – the ge

Published February19, 2014 | Council Minutes | 1784

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