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


April 21, 2016

Minutes

The April 21, 2016 Regular Meeting of the Board of Adjustment opened at 7:30pm. The clerk read the notice of compliance with the "Open public meetings act." Present were Board members: Mr. Spader, Mr. Kelly, Chairman Struncius, Mr. Schneider, Mr. Dixon, Mr. DePolo and Ms. Crapser
Absent – Mr. Reilly and Mr. Davis

Motion by Mr. Spader, second by Mr. Schneider to memorialize the minutes of March 3, 2016
In favor – Spader, Kelly, Reilly, Reynolds, Dixon, Schneider and Struncius
Opposed - None

Motion by Mr. Spader, second by Mr. Schneider to memorialize the minutes of March 17, 2016
In favor – Spader, Kelly, Struncius, Schneider, Dixon, DePolo and Davis
Opposed: None

Memorialize Resolutions
Motion by Mr. Kelly, second by Mr. Schneider to memorialize the action and vote approving application 2015-56 –of John/Lisa Renzulli – 105 Boardwalk – with conditions
In favor – Dixon, Schneider, DePolo, Crapser and Struncius
Opposed: None
Motion by Mr. Spader, second by Mr. Reynolds to memorialize the action and vote approving application 2016-08 – Godwin Family Properties, LLC – 403 Channel Drive – with conditions
In favor - Spader, Kelly, Reynolds, Dixon, Schneider and DePolo
Opposed: None
Motion by Mr. Spader, second by Mr. Schneider to memorialize the action and vote approving application #2016-15 of Michael/Carrie Godesky - 216 Baltimore – with conditions
In favor – Spader, Kelly, Schneider, DePolo, Crapser and
Struncius
Opposed: None


Application #2015-52 – Patrick/Allison Sheehan – 309 New York Avenue – Block 41; Lot 5 – Applicant constructed an assessor structure in excess of allowable height; structure is being utilized for
(Sheehan not heard – deficient notice)
Application #2015-33 – Long Point Lane LLC/Dave Bassinder – 33 Central Avenue -`Block 100; Lot 12 – Applicant wishes to demolish existing single family dwelling and construct a new FEMA compliant single family dwelling.
(Bassinder not heard – deficient notice)
Application #2015-53 – Nelson/Natalie Ferreira- 1714 Beacon Lane – Applicant reconstructed and reconfigured front decks and created storage under.
John J. Jackson attorney for applicant stated that the applicants purchased the home in 2014 and there is a preexisting retaining wall encroaching onto municipal property located on the property. The wall is there for purposes of holding up an existing dune; however, the applicants agreed to move the wall if necessary.
When the applicants purchased the property, the property had been granted a front yard setback of 20 feet. However, the property subsequently became part of the SF-5 zone in which the dimensions of the deck are now nonconforming. After some time, the deck suffered from dry rot and water damage and was reconstructed within the same footprint of the previous deck. The applicants are seeking approval for the reconstructed front deck and for a side yard setback variance for the rear deck, which is also a preexisting condition. The rear deck is located next to a wild area, and therefore will have a minimal impact on surrounding properties. The renovations done to the house, including the reconstruction of the noncomplying deck, significantly improved the curb appeal of the home and it is now substantially more attractive.
James McCann, applicant’s builder sworn stated that the deck was reconstructed after it was discovered to be rotting and damaged; it was extended with reinforced steel three feet to the side to align with the corner of the house, and a second story with a roof was added, as well as pillars. The deck was not extended any farther into the front yard. The bottom portion of the deck, where the applicants stored garbage and recycling receptacles, was enclosed for a cleaner look. There is no heating inside this space, nor is it a habitable space. It is currently being used for the same purpose. No permits were issued for the reconstruction of this deck, and there have been no town inspections of the deck.



Conditions


1. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining any other approvals or permits from other governmental agencies, as may be required by law, including but not limited to the Municipality’s and State’s affordable housing regulations; and the applicant shall comply with any requirements or conditions of such approvals or permits.

2. The applicant must comply with the Development Fee Ordinance of the Borough of Point Pleasant Beach, if applicable, which Ordinance is intended to generate revenue to facilitate the provision of affordable housing.

3. In the event Applicant or any future owner does any major remodeling and/or roof work, the air conditioner condenser shall be relocated to the roof.

4. The applicant is to enter into a license agreement with the Borough in order to retain the retaining wall that is constructed on Borough property, unless the Borough accepts ownership of the wall.

5. The applicant shall obtain all approvals and building permits for the completed work.

Deliberations

Spader – Appears to be a quality improvement; aesthetically pleasing. Support application
Kelly – Improvement over what was there before. Tired of forgiving people – you are in this business and know that you need permits. I take offense to that.
Dixon – I would have improved it if you came in front of the board. Did an excellent job.
Schneider – A little upsetting about the permits. People who went through Sandy had to get permits. It is aesthetically pleasing. Will support.
DePolo – Would have approved if applicant came initially.
Crapser – Also would have approved the application. It is beautiful and would be happy to live next to it. Would approve application
Reynolds – It is beautiful and it does look good and I agree I probably would have approved it. If it get approved it needs inspections to ensure that it is safe. Inquired if we are settled with the encroachment on the Borough property.
Motion Mr. Spader, second by Mr. Reynolds, to approve Application #2015-53 – Nelson/Natalie Ferreira- 1714 Beacon Lane with conditions.
In favor: Spader, Kelly, Dixon, Schneider, DePolo, Crapser and Reynolds
Opposed: None
Application approved with conditions
Chairman Struncius
Application #2015-41 – Mark Finkelstein – 206 New York Avenue – Block 31; Lot 17.01 – Applicant would like to install a generator in the side yard setback. Applicant previously installed an outdoor shower.
Finkelstein application carried without notice from the February 18, 2016 meeting

James Stahl, Esquire, applicant for attorney stated that the applicant submitted permits for the existing outdoor shower.Exhibit A-3 –
construction permit entered;A4 Construction permit entered; A-5 survey; A-6, A7, A8 photos entered.
Mr. Stahl opined that it is not possible to locate the generator in any other location on the property. The Board disagreed due to the fact the applicant has a large deck and large yard in the rear that could easily support the generator.


Mark Finkelstein, applicant, sworn, stated that the rear deck and outdoor shower were significantly damaged during Super Storm Sandy. The deck was removed and replaced with a smaller deck; however, the deck still occupies an area from property line to property line in the rear yard. The Board had issue with such a large amount of coverage.

Tom Magarelli, applicant’s contractor, sworn, stated that the applicant’s existing outdoor shower faces the neighboring property on the right side of the home. Generators need to be installed five feet away from any windows and 18 inches away from the home. The generator could alternatively be installed in the backyard near the pool on the wooden pavers.

Mr. Kelly stated that there is no access to the backyard in case of emergency on the west side of the home. The shower is blocking the access. Mr. Kelly said the applicant has a problem and the generator would add to the negative condition.

Mr. Dixon stated that you won’t even be able to use the generator during a storm because the applicant’s electrical outlets will be under water. The air conditioners are not flood compliant.

Deliberations

Spader – Very sensitive to side yard intrusion. See this as a destroyed area. There are no neighbors here to object but we have a responsibility to the neighbor’s. You have a beautiful back yard because you are intruding on the side yard setback. I was hoping that the applicant would come back and say they agree not to have a deck from property line to property line and that the shower should be moved to be a good neighbor. Putting a generator 6 inches off the property line is not being a good neighbor. It is not a necessity; if you want it put it in a conforming location. Not in favor. Would have liked to have seen an adjustment to the ramp. Have trouble memorializing something that should not have happened.

Kelly – We discussed the ramp at the last meeting. I am concerned that there is no access to the rear yard in case of an emergency. Trying to be positive but it is poor planning. You are going to have a real problem if there is a fire.

Reynolds – The generator will be 6 inches from the property line. The back yard is plenty big, put the generator back there. I am not going to put my stamp of approval on these other non-conformities and setback issues.

Dixon – I understand Mr. Finkelstein that the town allowed this - I don’t know why – I am surprised the neighbor is not here with those 4 big air conditioners. If someone moves next to you and wants to replace the fence it is only 6 inches from their property line.

Schneider - I do not see why Mr. Finkelstein should be punished for previous conditions but I cannot seeing allowing a generator 6 inches off the fence. I would have a major issue granting another variance that close to your neighbor. There is plenty of room in your back yard. You might not find it aesthetically pleasing but if you want a generator you can put it in a conforming location.

DePolo – I have not seen an access blocked like that - then putting the generator to add to that condition – Quality of life issues for future neighbor - would not be in favor

Crapser – no comment

Struncius – We should not aggravate the situation in the side yard setback. It already has 4 very large air conditioners. The fence is over 6 feet – proximity to the fence. There are other areas to place it.

Motion by Mr. Spader, second by Mr. Reynolds to deny application #2015-41 – Mark Finkelstein – 206 New York Avenue – Block 31; Lot 17.01

In favor – Spader, Kelly, Reynolds, Schneider, DePolo and Struncius
Opposed: None

Application denied

Meeting adjourned at 10:00pm

Attest: Karen L. Mills, LUA, Clerk of the Board


Published June17, 2016 | Board of Adjustment Minutes | 2348


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