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 19, 2007


The April 19, 2007 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: Chairman Moberg, Mr. Wolfersberger, Mr. Simon, Mrs. Tooker, Mr. Cangelosi and Mr. Struncius Alternates: Mr. Leonard, Mr. Reilly, Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Ardito

Motion by Mr. Reynolds, second by Mr. Wolfersberger to memorialize the action and vote approving the minutes of the April 5, 2007 meeting.

Vote: Simon, Wolfersberger, Moberg, Reilly and Reynolds……………………….Yea
Opposed: None

Application #2006-55 – Jim & Laura MacMillan, 109 Atlantic Avenue, Block 63; Lot 5; Applicant wishes to add a 1 story addition where the existing deck is and then add a new deck and stairs. Steven A. Pardes, attorney for applicant. John C. Amelchenko, Professional architect, credentials accepted. Home is a 1-½ single story residence. John Amelchenko had originally designed the front porch and internal improvements for the applicant in 1988. The spiral staircase is impractical. Applicant is looking to provide secondary egress and expand kitchen space on east side. New improvements will slightly increase building coverage by 1.3%. The deck currently leaks and applicant wishes to install a fiberglass roof. John Amelchenko stated that the applicant wishes to construct a new deck and an external staircase. The proposed addition on the east side of the home will replace the existing deck. The applicants have owned the home since 1986 and have used it as their principal residence. The existing spiral staircase has proven to be a hardship for moving furniture upstairs. The proposed deck and addition are aesthetically pleasing and will have no negative impact to the surrounding neighbors. The proposed addition will provide for the expansion of the existing kitchen. The Board found that pre-existing nonconformities couldn't be remedied. The Board found the increase of 70 square feet to be deminimus. James D. MacMillan testified that he does not rent out rooms and that it was dangerous to move furniture on the spiral staircase. His wife wants to increase kitchen space.

No audience questions/comments

Steven A. Pardes: 2 things, aesthetics and safety. New staircase will look like it is incorporated into the home.


Mr. Leonard: What I mainly have heard is the need for safety reasons. I understand how difficult a spiral staircase can be to navigate. The addition to the building coverage is very small; much more appealing look. It flows to the backyard. 2 pos/ 2 neg. Positive side; Safety reason and aesthetics. Negatives; External access to second floor (could be rented) In favor of application as proposed.

Mr. Wolfersberger: Safety is an issue. Mr. Amelchenko has once again done an outstanding job. Increase in building coverage is deminimus; it is very small. If it weren't for the spiral staircase I would be voting against this application. In favor.

Mr. Reilly: I see no problem with an outside staircase. Especially the way it has been designed. I am not convinced that this could not of been done without increasing building coverage. I am inclined to not vote in favor of this.

Cangelosi: Improvements are very attractive, creative and functional. I do believe that these changes could have been taken under the roof. I think it is a minimal increase to the coverage ratios. Yes, we are seeing a creeping up of usage on lots and this one is a perfect example. I will be in favor of this application.


1. In consideration of the Board granting the external second floor staircase, the internal spiral staircase must remain, in order to preserve the unity of the first and second floors.

Motion by Mr. Leonard, second by Mr. Cangelosi to approve application #2006-55 of the Macmillan's.

Vote: Simon, Wolfersberger, Struncius, Cangelosi, Moberg and Leonard…………Yea
Opposed: Reilly……………………………………………………………………….Nay

Application #2006-20- Suzanne Lefabvre, 18 Danby Place, Block 121; Lot 5.03; Applicant wishes to replace existing half story with a new wider and taller story. Due to garage/basement area underneath, interpretation is single-family dwelling with three stories. Mr. Reilly has stepped down from this application. Steven A. Pardes, attorney for applicant. Richard Graham, professional architect; Credentials, accepted. A-3 entered; Elevation Packet. A-4 through A-18; Photos of home and surrounding properties entered taken today by Richard Graham Existing home is 1 ½ story. Richard Graham stated that applicant seeks to demolish the existing second story of the home and construct a taller second story to the home. Applicant has owned property for 31 years and also owns lot 5.08 as indicated on tax map. The exterior of the home will be done in Earth tones. The height of the home will be increased an additional 2-1/2 feet. The existing dwelling contains a ground floor garage/basement that is considered to be a separate story; therefore a variance is required for the (3) building stories. The bay window will be eliminated, thereby correcting a pre-existing non-conformity. The home will be sided with James Hardie non-combustible fiber cement siding. The home will be aesthetically pleasing and have no substantial negative impact on the surrounding properties. The improvements to the home will increase the safety by having 2 staircases that will provide an additional egress in the event of a fire. Decks will now be covered to have protection from the elements while entering and exiting the home. Mr. Wolfersberger inquired what the height and building coverage would be? Upon reviewing the calculation the Board Engineer concluded that calculations were based upon square footage of the combined lots. The Board recommends that lot 5.03 and lot 5.08 be combined. Steve Pardes explained that lot 5.08 is not a buildable lot but that is could very well account for the difference in the calculations in lot area and states that the applicant will combine the lots as a condition. (Building coverage will then be 52%) Basement cannot be finished as living space due to flood requirements. Mr. Ardito inquired of the height of the first habitable floor? (19.22 feet) Applicant is taking an outmoded substandard living level and making it more livable. Richard Graham went on to summarize that this will be an aesthetic and safety enhancement of the property. Renovations will bring the staircase into compliance. The furnace and a/c unit will be moved to comply with flood zone. Mr. Wolfersberger stated that he would prefer to see the home wider and lower. Suzanne Lefebrve, applicant, sworn, stated that she has owned the property for 31 years and that this home has been rented (seasonally) to the same 10 professionals (Attorneys/accountants) for the past 10 or 11 years. Steven A. Pardes summarized the application by stating that it is an aesthetic improvement and will be bringing the home into safety and flood compliance. Richard Graham has been very considerate with his design in reference to the surrounding neighbor's.

No audience questions/comments


Mr. Struncius – I think the benefits outweigh the detriments in terms of the height increase. The home is now very much a box style without any character. The home is now going to have dimension added to it. The detail from an aesthetic point of view outweighs what is there. The finishes that are outlined and on our prints should be conditioned. I keep looking at the positives, and yes we are talking about an additional 3 feet, but I do not get the feeling that the home is too high. I do not think it makes it obnoxiously out of character. I am in favor

Mr. Wolfersberger – I am agreeing with Mr. Struncius on all the positives, however I do feel that you can get the architectural style without going so high. Not in favor.

Mr. Moberg – One of things I look at are the positive aesthetic features (new siding, roofing, foundation, bricking) that are safety features. It will now be equipped to be safe. Mechanicals being brought out of the flood. Negative Criteria – Going up a few feet. If you stand on the Boardwalk it looks like it is 20 feet. It will not be oppressive. I do not think the height will be a negative impact on the neighbors. In favor as it is.

Mr. Reynolds- I am really happy with the safety features ( fireproof siding, stairs, aesthetics); the height is not that big of a deal. I also think it will be good for the neighborhood. In favor of this application.


1. The applicant is to consolidate lots 5.03 and 5.08 by deed. A copy of the recorded Deed of Consolidation is to be provided to the Zoning Officer prior to the issuance of a building permit.

2. The ground floor is not to be used for habitable space. It is to remain unheated and is to comply with the requirements of section 19-10 “Flood Damage Prevention”.

3. The exterior of the home is to comply with the testimony given before the Board on April 19, 2007. The roofing on the second story was to be Timberline shingle. The roof skirt between the first and second floors will be a standing seam metal roof. The home’s siding will be James Hardie non-combustible fiber cement siding and the foundation shall have a stone veneer.

4. The building is to be painted in earth tone colors.

Motion by Mr. Struncius, second by Mr. Reynolds to approve application #2006-20 with conditions.

Vote: Simon, Struncius, Moberg, Cangelosi and Reynolds……………………………Yea
Opposed: Wolfersberger and Reynolds…………………………………………………Nay

Application approved with conditions

Application #2007-01 – Elie & Pierre Chedid, 103 Forman Avenue, Block 68; Lot 2; Applicant wishes to renovate the existing structure to provide for 6 condominiums units on three floors with an elevator. (Application carried without notice to May 3, 2007)

Meeting adjourned at 10:30

Attest: Karen L. Mills
Clerk of the Board

Published May07, 2007 | Board of Adjustment Minutes | 412

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