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

June 16, 2016


The June 16, 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. Kelly, Mr. Reynolds, vice-chair Reilly, Chairman Struncius, Mr. Schneider, Mr. Dixon, Mr. DePolo and Ms. Crapser
Absent – Mr. Spader and Mr. Davis

Motion by Mr. Reynolds, second by Mr. Kelly to memorialize the minutes of April 21, 2016
In favor – Kelly, Reynolds, Struncius, Schneider, DePolo and Crasper
Opposed: None

Memorialize Resolution
Motion by Mr. Reynolds, second by Mr. Schneider to memorialize application #2016-20 of Deborah Seaberg – 124 Randall Avenue – with conditions
In favor – Kelly, Reynolds, Dixon, Schneider and Struncius
Opposed - None
Motion by Mr. Kelly, second by Mr. Schneider to memorialize application #2016-21 of Lorraine/Jeffrey Bryant – 806 Long Point Lane – with conditions
In favor – Kelly, Dixon, Schneider, Crasper and Struncius
Opposed - None
Resolution extension request - #2012-30 – Morgan McLachlan – 1810 Beacon Lane –
Motion by Mr. Reilly to extend resolution for 90 days, second by Mr. Kelly
In favor – Reilly and Kelly
Opposed – None
Request approved with conditions

Application #2015-52 – Patrick/Allison Sheehan (Abatare Builders) – 309 New York – Block – 41; Lot 5 – Applicant constructed an accessory structure in excess of allowable height and it is being utilized for residence purposes.
Ben Montenegro is the conflict attorney for this application.
Allison Sheehan, applicant, sworn. Joseph Longo, applicant’s builder, sworn testified that he is a principal of Abatare Builders, Inc. and was contracted to construct the new detached accessory garage structure as depicted on the architectural plan submitted (Exhibit A-3). He was aware of the 16 foot height requirement for a detached accessory structure, however, in constructing the structure, he inadvertently constructed same at 15 feet 9 inches as measured from grade. He is now aware that the Borough Zoning Ordinance requires the calculation of height to be measured from curb (not from grade) and after completing the structure and applying for final inspection, he was made aware that as measured from curb, the structure is 17 feet 9 inches. He testified and confirmed that the structure contains no habitable/residence use inasmuch as there is no plumbing, no heat and no air conditioning within the structure. He noted that the attic is accessed by a pull down staircase for storage/access purposes only and that the first level has a padded floor and sheetrock inasmuch as same is used as an exercise room/gym by the applicant’s son. He stated that the structure as constructed is an aesthetic improvement to the site.

No audience questions/comments

Kelly – Make sure next time you check.
Reynolds – I have no problem – we just need to make sure there is no residential use.
Reilly – Had no real problem; just concerned that there is not a residential use.
Dixon – I feel the same; nice garage – fits with the house. It was a mistake just hopes it does not happen again.
Schneider – It is a nice garage and I believe if you had come for the variance it would have been approved.
DePolo – As long as no one is living in it I am fine.
Motion by Mr. Reynolds, second by vice-chair Reilly to approve application #2015-52 of Patrick/Allison Sheehan (Abatare Builders) – 309 New York – Block – 41; Lot 5 – with conditions
In favor – Kelly, Reynolds, Reilly, Dixon, Schneider, DePolo and
Opposed: None
Application approved with conditions

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.
Mr. Reynolds has stepped down from the Long Point Lane LLC matter.
Ron Gasiorowski, attorney for applicant. Tim Lurie, applicant’s Professional Engineer, sworn, stated that the plot plan shows the layout of the property but is not completely sure where the easement is located. The lot is irregular. There is an existing two story garage with an apartment above it. Proposing an 1800 square foot home. Eliminating side yard setback variance. A-3 Elevation and floor plan of home entered. Three (3) bedroom home, kitchen and living room. Chairman Struncius inquired why the home is located so far back on the lot. Ron Gasiorowski stated it is because of an existing easement. When questioned where exactly the easement is located the Engineer stated that it was never finalized and was still in negotiations. A-4 Google Earth Photograph entered of property. The Engineer stated it is an error on his plan.
Chairman Struncius is curious about the other usage going on. It looks like it is being utilized as a parking lot.
The Board heard testimony and was concerned that they did not have an accurate plot plan and recorded deed. So the application will be carried.

Motion by vice-chair Reilly, second by Mr. Schneider to carry application #2015-33 – Long Point Lane LLC to August 18, 2016 without notice.
In favor – Kelly, Reilly, Dixon, Schneider, DePolo, Crasper and Struncius
Opposed: None
Application carried without notice
Mr. Gasiorowski has waived the time on the record for this application to be heard.

Application #2016-23 – Stan Osofsky – 101 Atlantic Avenue – Block 63; Lot 1 – Applicant would like to install an 8 by 12 foot shed in rear yard.
Stan Osofsky, applicant, sworn, stated that he is looking to build a shed to house his back yard stuff. House is 21% coverage and deck is 15% coverage and permeable. Grass in under the existing deck. Shed will be conforming and aesthetically pleasing. Shed will not have a negative impact on surrounding neighbors.
No audience questions/comments
Kelly – Have no problem with the shed
Reynolds – Do we like to go over on coverage – No- but taking into consideration the open decking I have no problem with the shed.
Reilly - Good location for the shed – no problem
Dixon- Nothing to add as it meets all the requirements of the ordinance
Schneider – Beautiful shed – fine with it
DePolo – Fine with it – you just bought the house and you don’t have a garage – only option
Crasper – fine with it – I know it is hard to store stuff when you don’t have a garage.
Struncius – Building coverage is the strictest thing – here is the reason why we are allowing the shed – you have a large deck that lets water go through. There is no massing with a home at 21%. You are to keep grass and stone under the deck.
Motion by vice-chair Reilly, second by Mr. Reynolds o approve application #2016-23 of Stan Osofsky – 101 Atlantic Avenue – Block 63; Lot 1 with conditions
In favor – Kelly, Reynolds, Reilly, Dixon, Schneider, DePolo and Struncius
Application approved with conditions

1. The shed should be anchored to avoid flotation
2. The shed is to be built as described to the board at the time of the meeting.

Application #2016-25 - Steiny Girls, LLC/ Greg Steinhauser – 1301 St. Louis Avenue – Block 21; Lot 20 – Applicant wishes to construct an 8 foot by 18 foot deck.
Mr. Kelly has stepped down from the Steiny Girls LLC application.
Greg Steinhauser applicant, sworn. Jason Shamy, attorney for applicant. A-3 – Photos of property. Corner lot and the deck is the front setback. Hardship application – seeking relief for proposed front yard setback of 20 feet (to proposed deck, whereas 25 feet is required; preexisting and proposed front yard setback of 15 feet (to building), whereas 25 feet is required; preexisting and proposed rear yard setback of 9 feet (to building), whereas 30 feet is required; preexisting nonconforming building coverage of 32.3%, and proposed building coverage of 35.6%, whereas 30% is the maximum permitted.
Greg Steinhauser, applicant, stated that there are two sets of existing glass sliding doors on the side of the home. One set of doors currently has no proper landing or stairs for ingress and egress, while the other set of doors has a set of attached stairs which are not up to code. As a solution to this, the applicant is seeking to remove the existing set of stairs and construct a new deck for access to both sets of sliding glass doors. The neighboring property closest in proximity to the proposed new deck features a detached windowless garage nearest the site where construction will take place. The residence on the neighboring property is located farther into the property and therefore will not be affected by this deck addition.
The proposed new deck will be 8x18 feet and will feature a 3 foot high railing. The deck will uncovered and be open underneath for water to percolate into grass, and structured with concrete footings.
No audience questions/comments

Reynolds - concerned about the shower – Is that permitted? (Yes) other than that I will be in favor. Do not think it will impede on anything.
Reilly – Does not have a problem with it either. Location makes it easier to live with.
Dixon – Small deck; won’t affect the neighbor’s – in favor
Schneider – Improving a hazardous situation – in favor
DePolo – in favor – correcting a safety issue. Location of deck not having a big impact and with the impervious decking – no issues
Crasper – Initially had a concern with building coverage – but with the deck being uncovered and impervious has alleviated that concern.
Struncius - Dealing with extreme leniency on building coverages – this is different than a new home being built. The openness, drainage adding to existing structure.
Motion by vice-chair Reilly, second by Mr. Dixon to approve application #2016-25 - Steiny Girls, LLC/ Greg Steinhauser – 1301 St. Louis Avenue – Block 21; Lot 20 – with conditions

1. The new deck is to have a railing.

2. The area under the deck is to be impervious to allow rainwater to percolate into the ground.

Application approved with conditions

Application #2016-22 – Thomas Macagnano – 107 Griffiths – Block 161; Lot 29 – Applicant wishes to construct a deck in the front yard.
Thomas Macagnano, applicant, sworn, stated that the front stairs, railing and shrubbery were damaged beyond repair as a result of Superstorm Sandy and is proposing to construct a new open front deck with railing on the property. The new deck will be 6 feet deep, reduced from the original proposal of 8 feet deep based upon the recommendations of the Board. The deck will be 33 feet wide with an opening near the driveway for access and there will be landscaping in front of the deck. The deck will be utilized as a space for members of the household and guests to gather and socialize, with space necessary for patio furniture.

Gene Caporale, applicant’s builder, sworn stated that the new deck will be filled out with white vinyl trim, AZEK material and will feature a lattice bottom. The existing walkway, front landing, and steps will be removed and underneath the deck there will be pervious coverage. The deck will feature white railing with a wood tone, and the color of the deck will match the existing house.

No audience questions/comments
Kelly – the house itself needs something- this will improve the look of the home - in favor
Reynolds – I think the 6 feet versus the 8 feet eliminates the over-massing I was concerned with – the front yard is small.
Reilly – I think you will be very happy with the 6 feet.

Dixon – I don’t mine the 6 feet – I don’t like the deck covering the whole front of the home.
Schneider – You do have a bit of a hardship. You gave us two feet and the material will look good. It is hard to sit in the backyard with the trains going by. In favor.
DePolo – I going to approve it also – The Street is a tight street to begin with. This will either be a–. home run or “man how that ever get approved”. Cautiously optimistic
Struncius – I listened to Mr. Dixon issues with over use – this is a balancing issue – however weighing the aesthetic value against what is there - That is why I searched for a picture. The aesthetic value weighs heavily here. Again we have things in place to police issues in the future and control if things get out of hand in front of the home. This will make things visually better.

1. The plan is to be revised to show the deck as being reduced to six (6) feet in depth.

2. The applicant is to supply a landscape plan to the Board Engineer for his review and approval.

3. Any pervious surfaces below the deck are to be removed.

4. There shall be no more than two (2) steps to access the deck.

5. The decking material is to be white vinyl cover aluminum railings with a wood tone AZEK floor.

Motion by vice chair Reilly, second by Mr. Reynolds to approve application #2016-22 of Thomas Macagnano – 107 Griffiths – Block 161; Lot 29 with conditions
In favor – Kelly, Reynolds, Reilly, Schneider, DePolo and Struncius
Opposed: Dixon

Application approved with conditions

Meeting adjourned at 9:45pm
Attest: Karen L. Mills, Clerk of the Board, LUA

Published August25, 2016 | Board of Adjustment Minutes | 2387

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