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 2, 2014

Minutes

The July 2, 2014 regular meeting of the Point Pleasant Beach Planning Board opened at 7:30 pm. The Clerk read the notice of compliance with the "Open Public Meetings Act. Present were Board members Chairman Migut, Mr. Highton, Mr. Winter, Ms. Devon, Mrs. Mutter, Councilman Cortes and Mr. Paesano
Absent: Loder,Gagnon and Ritchings
Also present: Karen Mills, Steve Gleeson and Ray Savacool


Motion by Ms. Mutter, second by Ms. Devon to memorialize the minutes of June 4, 2014

In favor: Cortes, Devon, Mutter and Migut
Opposed: None

Memorialize Resolution

Motion by Councilman Cortes, second by Ms. Mutter to memorialize the action and vote approving application #2013-362 of B & H 1997, LLC (Jaeger Lumber) 411 Central with conditions.

In favor: Councilman Cortes, Ms. Devon and Ms. Mutter
Opposed: None


Letter from James H. Clayton – requesting vacating denial of application #2014-369 and considering continuance.

Motion by Mr. Paesano to vacate denial and reopen application #2014-369 of James H. Clayton Family Trust to be heard on August 6, 2014, second by Mr. Highton

In favor: Paesano, Highton, Winter, Cortes, Devon, Mutter and Migut
Opposed: None



Ordinance #2014-21 – Double Curb Cut ordinance -Review and comments for Mayor and Council.

Council Cortes suggested the title be changed to second curb cut. Mr. Paesano questioned the present procedure for the second curb cut. Ray Savacool stated that all curb cuts are approved by Mayor and Council.

Motion by Mr. Paesano, second by Ms. Devon to recommend support of ordinance #2014-21-Double curb cut with the change to the name to “second curb cut “to Mayor and Council.

In favor: Paesano, Highton, Winter, Cortes, Devon, Mutter and Migut
Opposed: None




Application #2014-370 – Jeffrey M. & Jennifer A. Childers – 336 Curtis Avenue – Block 112; Lot 32 & 33 – Zone SF5 – Applicant wishes to subdivide property into two separate lots, each 50 feet by approximately 234 feet and remove both existing dwellings.

Peter Kearns, Esq, applicant’s attorney, stated that there is currently a single family home with a single family non-conformity in the rear. Applicant’s intention is to remove all structures from the property and subdivide the lot into two conforming empty lots. Peter Kearns’s addressed the Engineer’s letter. The intent is to leave the mature trees on the property and plant more trees in the future.

Audience questions/comments

Gary Mecca, 335 Curtis – Stated that most of the homes are wider than 50 - feet and questioned the side setbacks. He was informed that anything built will have to conform or go to the Board of Adjustment. He is also worried about the demolition of the home and how will they be guaranteed that the demolition will not create a mess. He was directed to call code enforcement if there is a problem and informed that all projects post bonds.

Penny Mecca, 335 Curtis Avenue – Wanted the comments about the tax map clarified. She was informed that the east side of the street is a SF5 zone where a 50 foot width wide lots are required.

Peter Kearns, closing statement.

Ray Savacool commented that no variances are being sought.

Deliberations

Migut – Thinks it is a good subdivision and gets rid of a non-conforming use.

Highton – agrees – lot is oversized for this zone – In favor.

Paesano – Agrees also – lot are completely conforming and have more than enough square footage and size that is required in this zone. In favor

Devon – Will be on favor.

Motion by Mr. Paesano, second by Mr. Winter to approve application #2014-370 of Jeffrey Childers.

In favor: Paesano, Highton, Winter, Cortes, Devon, Mutter and Migut
Opposed: None

Application approved


Application #2014-371 – Scot Dolan – 637 – 639 Arnold Avenue – Block 202; Lot 2 – Zone – GC (General Commercial) - Applicant proposes to renovate second floor into two (2 bedroom) residential apartments and continue to use first floor for a conforming use.

William Gage, Esq., attorney for applicant, stated that the applicant is the contract purchaser. Applicant is looking to have three (3) retail uses downstairs and two (2) residential units upstairs. William Gage reviewed requested variances and informed the board of the shared easement between the applicant and the owners of Aquatecture Design, Inc.

Scott Dolan, applicant stated that he is the contract purchaser and that it took him a while to find a structural engineer that would look at this building. He said his goal is to save the character of the building. Once he owns the property there is a lot of things that need to be checked. The walls need to be removed to replace the electric and they have no idea how much structural damage there is. There have been a lot of changes to the building through the years; it is tough to say what was done originally. Goal is to use existing staircase for access to his apartment; hopefully it can be saved. The other apartment will be accessed from to exterior rear staircase. Ray Savacool asked for clarification of access to the other apartment. William Gage referenced the letter from the Historical Commission hoping that some of the historic value of the building will be salvaged. Scott Dolan stated that he will preserve what is possible; he has no way of knowing at this time what will be able to be recycled but he is happy to donate the ticker booth. He will use cedar shake shingle. Does not plan to change much on the exterior. Any signage will comply with code. Onsite parking was discussed and due to the shared easement there will be no onsite parking.
Mark Marcille, Professional Architect, sworn, credentials accepted, stated their intention is to revitalize the space. Second floor will be brought up to code, adding shutters introducing an apron roof to add some lighting. All new materials, siding and roofing. Did not crawl under building but you can tell that the floor is in bad shape. There will be some surprises but is confident that it can be restored. Ray Savacool questioned why both units could not be accessed by the internal staircase. Mark Marcille replied that it would require demolishing the existing stairwell which everyone would like to see preserved.

Audience questions

Jim Inzro – Manages building to the west for the Swebel Family Trust and has questions in reference to the roof deck. (It is just a roof, no deck, it is just access to the apartment). The trust is opposed to having a balcony there. Inquired where the mechanicals are being located. (Second floor roof)It is a railroad apartment and their only source of light is a few windows.

It is agreed that an open fence will be installed. It will limit the usage to the roof area.

Jason Shamy, 702 Grove Street – Just want to make sure that I understand that there is no longer a balcony and it will just be a walkway. (Correct)

Robert Burdick, PE, PP reviewed Ray Savacool’s letter.

John Amelchenko – Licensed architect and owner of neighboring building. Has concerns over the 1920 easement agreement and the parking of cars. After much discussion it was resolved that no cars will be parked and that they will abate the curb cut.

The Board determined that the renovation will be an aesthetic improvement and will revitalize the downtown area and was pleased that the applicant proposes to restore the historic quality of the interior of the building. The Board found the addition of the rear stairway to the second floor residential unit causes an increase of the existing nonconforming building coverage to be de minimus. The Board determined that the renovations could be done without any negative impact on surrounding property owners.



Deliberations

Chairman Migut – The application is a welcomed rejuvenation to the downtown area. Utilizing some changes to the master plan which allows residential over commercial which almost caters to pedestrian bound people. Not too concerned about losing two onsite parking spaces; there is plenty of parking in the area. Glad that the applicant agreed to work with the Historic Preservation Commission. Given the conditions imposed will be in favor of the application.



Conditions

1. The applicant agreed to comply with the Board’s Engineer’s letter of June 16, 2014.

2. The applicant shall preserve and incorporate historical elements of the interior of the building, including the second floor staircase and wainscoting.

3. Applicant shall donate the historic ticket booth to the Historic Preservation Commission.

4. Applicant shall consult with the Historic Preservation Commission to design a historically appropriate façade.

5. If applicant is able to install a walkway on the access floor apartment, then applicant shall install a four-foot walkway and this area’s use shall be restricted to residential access. Applicant will install an open fence to screen this walkway. Applicant will consult with neighbors on the design prior to the issuance of a construction permit.

6. The applicant will amend the plans to reflect the stairway on the northwest corner and the increase in building coverage.

7. The gas meters shall be moved under the stairwell in the northern alley.

8. No off-street parking in the northern alley will be permitted. The curb cut will be removed and replaced with pavers to match the existing site.


Motion by Ms. Mutter, second by Mr. Winter to approve application #2014-371 of Scott Dolan, 371 Arnold Avenue with conditions

In favor: Paesano, Highton, Winter, Cortes, Devon, Mutter and Migut
Opposed: None

Application approved with conditions

Meeting adjourned at 10:10pm


Attest: Karen Mills, Clerk of the Board


Published August08, 2014 | Planning Board Minutes | 1923


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