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


November 3, 2016

Minutes

November 3, 2016 BOA minutes

The November 3, 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, Mr. Reilly, Chairman Struncius, Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Dixon, Mr. DePolo and Ms. Crasper
Absent – Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Schneider and Mr. Davis


Memorialize minutes –
Motion by Mr. Kelly, second by Mr. DePolo to memorialize the minutes of September 15, 2016
In favor: Kelly and DePolo
Opposed: None


Resolution Clarification – Fisher resolution (fence straddling pool)
Joe Kociuba, KGB Engineering Services, page 6 number Condition 12 states the fence should straddle the pool. Would like that omitted. Building Department was not sure what it meant and Ray’s notes didn’t have any notations.
Motion by Mr. Reilly, second by Mr. Spader to remove condition #12 from resolution 2015-28 of the Fisher Family Trust.
In favor: Spader, Kelly, Reilly, Struncius and Dixon
Opposed: None

Application #2016-34 – Tara/Robert Philp – 105 Arnold Avenue – Block 98; Lot 3 – Applicant wishes to demolish existing single family dwelling and construct a new FEMA compliant single family dwelling.
Robert and Tar Philp applicants sworn stated that they are looking for the following variance: proposed front yard setback of 12 feet, whereas 11.8 feet is existing and 25 feet is required. Photos taken today by Lou Obsuth entered as A-3, 4, 5, 6 and 7. Robert Philp stated that the proposed setback matches his neighbors and the home is in character with the neighborhood.
Lou Obsuth, applicant’s builder stated that the electrical wiring will be moved to the east side of the building and the exterior materials used on the home will be masonry board, and the siding will extend down to the bottom of the home.


Deliberations
Spader - Turns out that this is nothing more than a continued improvement. In favor
Kelly – I agree – Improvement for the area. Glad the electric is being moved
Reilly – Agrees with everything said – I also knew when I took one look at the property that was needed.
Dixon – Not much to add. Nice FEMA compliant home.
DePolo - Same reasons if you went back to the required setback it would like it didn’t belong.
Crasper – I agree with the rest of the board members. If you did go back it would not be in character.
Struncius – Always a little weirded out that there is no front door; but I understand it by not bringing the steps out. This home has features that we often ask for.

Motion by Mr. Spader, second by vice chair Reilly to approve application of #2016-34 – Tara/Robert Philp – 105 Arnold Avenue – with conditions

In favor – Spader, Kelly, Reilly, Dixon, DePolo, Crasper and Struncius
Opposed: None
Conditions
1. The electrical wiring will be moved to the east side of the building.
2. The exterior materials used on the home will be masonry board, and the siding will extend down to the bottom of the home.


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.
Application carried from August 18, 2016 without notice
Ron S. Gasiorowski, Esquire, applicant’s attorney stated that there was an easement placed on the property that extends through the neighboring property, approximately 50 years ago. The applicant consulted with the neighboring property owner to discuss a compromise on developing the property, given that the easement affects their property as well. The neighbor agreed to an encroachment on the easement so long as their ocean view is not obstructed. The applicant proposed to relocate the house to the north side of the lot, which will encroach on the existing easement. The front yard of the property has been utilized for private parking for the past 20 years.

The attorney was unaware of whether or not the applicant obtained the necessary permits to allow this condition on the property and reviewed the parking ordinance.

Tim Lurie, PE, PP, CME, applicant’s engineer stated that there is an easement on the property that extends to the neighbor’s property. There is an existing paved area on the property which extends from the rear of the existing home to the property line.
The width of the existing paved area on the property is approximately 28 feet wide.
The existing house is 600 square feet. The proposed house would have been 1,820 square feet. The existing house was damaged by Super Storm Sandy. The proposed new home was to have storage on the ground floor level and the main living floor on the second level.
Andrew Thomas, applicant’s Professional Planner, sworn, stated that there are a number of houses that are located further back into the property in the surrounding area and believes that locating the home further back on the property would provide a number of benefits.

Chairman Struncius thinks it is strange that right in the middle of the SF5 zone the applicant just parks cars in the front yard.
Audience questions/comments -
Stephen Beer, Central Ave – Lived on this block as a young boy and this home was the guest house. There was a home in the front. Wonders if there is still a guest house licenses? The Board was not aware of another home and there is not a guest house licenses. Understand the applicant also owns 28 Central and that the cars parking there are leaving at 2am and waking them up. There is also storage from the Tike Bar. The concern is there is a commercial refrigeration system under 28 Central also.

Deliberation
Spader – This is the way it has been for years; here is an opportunity to improve conditions and they still would be able to park in the back yard. Unless I hear something really interesting from my fellow board members I do not have a positive vote.
Kelly – If you are going to build a home with parking in front we really haven’t eliminated any non-conformities. I assume this situation is not going to be allowed any longer.
Reilly – Willing to accept the argument of enforcing the law is not our responsibility. A better job could have been done of moving the home forward. Leaning on the negative side.
Dixon – Home is still very small. There is a situation with the neighbor and the easement; limits where you can put this home. Does not think the home is over bearing – be an improvement over the existing home.
DePolo – One thing I hear is we are supposed to bring homes into compliance. There are slight improvements but I am looking at it collectively.
Crasper – Have issues with the rear setback and do not understand why it can’t be moved forward. Leaning to denial
Struncius – We try to make judgements in a zone if something is not detrimental. We are just getting an improved garage apartment. We could of gotten a home that is more fitting in the neighborhood. Odd way of keeping what’s going just because it has been there. We know that it has been a parking lot. There is 38 feet before the easement curve even begins. The house could have been built in the front of the lot. There is not enough difference to improve the property.
Motion by vice chair Reilly, second by Mr. Spader to deny application#2015-33 – Long Point Lane LLC/Dave Bassinder – 33 Central Avenue
In favor – Spader, Kelly, Reilly, Dixon, DePolo, Crasper and Struncius
Opposed: None
Application denied



Application #2016-38 – Eric Smith /Christine Hurley – 106 Delaware Avenue – Block 3; Lot 7 – Applicant wishes to renovate and construct an addition to an existing single family dwelling.
Eric Smith applicant, sworn, stated that they are seeking the following variances. Proposed rear yard setback of 21.9 feet (to stairs), whereas 30 feet is required; rear yard setback of 26.1 feet (to deck), whereas 30 feet is required; rear yard setback of 26.1 (to house), whereas 30 feet is required; building coverage 35%, whereas 30% is the maximum permitted; 3 proposed stories, whereas 2 stories are the maximum permitted.
Preexisting Nonconforming Conditions:
A. For preexisting front yard setback of 21.8 feet (to stairs), whereas 25 feet is required.
B. For preexisting side yard setback of 1.9 feet (to shower on west side), and 2.9 feet (to AC unit on west side), whereas 5 feet is required.
Eric Smith stated that the property has a preexisting nonconforming front yard setback, which will remain unaltered by the application. He is proposing to remove the existing second story deck on the front of the home to construct additions to the first and second floor in this location. At the rear of the home, the applicants are also proposing to enlarge the existing first floor deck and construct first and second floor additions to expand the den and kitchen on the first floor, and expand the bathroom on the second floor as well as provide a balcony. There will be a number of improvements made to the home to create a more modern structure and the expansion of the third story will make the attic more usable. The home was constructed in 1988. The siding for the building will be replaced with Hardi Plank.

Christine Hurley, applicant sworn stated that they need the improvements for their expanding family.

No audience questions/comments

Deliberation

Spader – Some places we don’t want to go to 35%, but here it is not an intrusion on neighbors. Visually it needs some improvement.
Kelly – I think the house needs some improvements. In favor
Reilly – I agree with Mr. Spader – I looked at the numbers and was not sure but when I looked at the property I realized you have a tough job.
Dixon – I do not see this being much of a problem.
DePolo – I approve the application. You were well prepared.

Crasper – I agree with the board.
Struncius - Just to note the safety concerns and things you are going to be upgrading. There will be an aesthetic upgrade. It is diminimus for the most part. The location and how it fits in the zone will be in favor.
Motion by Mr. Spader, second by vice chair Reilly to approve Application #2016-38 – Eric Smith /Christine Hurley – 106 Delaware Avenue with conditions
In favor – Spader, Kelly, Reilly, Dixon, DePolo, Crasper and Struncius
Opposed: None
Application approved with conditions
Condition
1. The applicant is to utilize Hardi Board exterior siding, as shown to the Board at the time of the hearing.


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


Published January06, 2017 | Board of Adjustment Minutes | 2470


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