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 1, 2007


The November 1, 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: Mr. Wolfersberger, Mr. Simon, and Mrs. Tooker Alternates: Mr. Reilly, and Mr. Reynolds

Roll call: Simon, Reilly, Wolfersberger, Tooker and Reynolds

Motion by Mr. Reilly, second by Mr. Reynolds to nominate Mr. Wolfersberger as acting Chairman

In favor – Simon, Reilly, Tooker and Reynolds
Opposed: None

Motion by Mrs. Tooker, second by Mr. Wolfersberger to memorialize the minutes of October 18, 2007 meeting

In favor – Simon, Reilly, Tooker, Wolfersberger and Reynolds
Opposed – None

Motion by Mr. Reilly second by Mr. Reynolds to memorialize the action and vote denying application #2007-18 of 104 Ocean Avenue, LLC; 1 Ocean Avenue

In favor – Wolfersberger, Reilly, Tooker and Reynolds
Opposed - none

Letter to amend Application #2006-40 – Carousel Inn, 1301 Ocean Avenue, Block 18.01; Lot 1 Applicant wishes to amend resolution to add independent landing for access to Unit #1. (Notice has been served) John Amelchenko, architect stated that previous approval for Northeast corner for 2-level porch. When reviewing construction process applicant approached him about having independent access to upper floor units. Removed steps that led to northeast balcony, within same square footage created landing and steps that led to entrance solely for upper units. Net result is folks on second and third floor have their own access. Garbage enclosure will be moved to conform to side yard setback.


Mrs. Tooker – I think it is coming out great – really a nice job – a class act. It is really beautiful I have no problem whatsoever.

Mr. Reilly – It appears to me to be a deminimus change. I would support it.

Mr. Wolfersberger – I as well – it is not impacting the neighbors anymore than the original approval.

Motion by Mr. Reilly second by Mr. Reynolds to approve amending application #2006-40.

In Favor: Simon, Reilly, Wolfersberger, Tooker and Reynolds
Opposed: None

Application #2007-13 – Janice & Luis Aportela, 307 Central Avenue. Block 107; Lots 4 & 5; Applicant intends to demolish the existing single-family dwelling and construct a new conforming single family dwelling. There currently exists a garage apartment. Applicant wishes to keep pre-existing garage rental unit. (Application is for use only; home complies)

William Bowe, attorney for applicant. Oversized dual lot with existing single family home and 1 car garage with 2- bedroom apartment. Applicant is going to demolish existing single family home and wishes to keep garage apartment. Robert Burdick, engineer/Professional Planner, reviewed engineers report. According to the Ocean County tax records there have been two residential uses on this property since 1932. The use predated the zoning ordinance and is a preexisting non-conforming use. A-3 Exhibit – Ocean County tax record. Building coverage will be 20% less than is allowable. Rear residence will remain in side yard setback area; the new residence side yard will be 12 feet. It will be aesthetically pleasing and meet current codes. Minimal disadvantage will be continuation of two residential uses. There are four other lots on block with two residential uses. Proposed dwelling will comply with flood requirements. Existing garage is one-story. Janet Aportella, applicant, sworn stated that currently there is a driveway that is approximately 14 feet wide; adequate property to turn cars around. Steve Ardito questioned if it is possible to raise garage apartment to meet flood elevation. (No) Mr. Reilly inquired if there is any thought of building a new structure in the rear? Janet Aportella replied that some time down the road they might. Mr. Wolfersberger stated that they would need to return to the board at that time.

Audience questions

Max Gagnon – Lives diagonally from property. Has seen garage and it is not a place you would want to be in a bad storm.

Mr. Galvin stated that if you have a valid pre-existing non-conforming use that you have a right to maintain it. Mr. Savacool stated that if they made a substantial improvement to the garage of more than 50% of structure that they would have to raise the building it to meet requirements.


Tooker – This is a double lot and they could sub-divide. We have recently granted a similar variance.

Ardito – What you have presented has helped us decide. The front house will be built to code. I am concerned about the habitation in the back building.

Wolfersberger – I see no negative impact and you are upgrading the main residence and conforming to the flood regulations. It has been there since 1932; I do not see a reason to deny this.

Reilly – Ideally I would prefer not to have this. If you rent seasonally it could be disruptive to the neighborhood; on the other hand with the evidence provided they have the right to continue the use. I would like them to consider thinking about improving the situation.

Reynolds – I agree with everything said. It will be an improvement, it is there.

Motion by Mr. Simon, second by Mr. Reynolds to approve application #2007-13.

In favor – Simon, Reilly, Wolfersberger, Tooker and Reynolds.
Opposed none

Application approved

Application #2007-14 – Mary Pearce & Peter Wolf, 802 Cedar Avenue. Block 92; Lot 23.02. Applicant wishes to renovate existing single family dwelling by removing existing second story porch and deck overhang on south side and add new addition to area under existing roof. Add a new two story deck/balcony and open terrace to west side.

Steven A. Pardes, attorney for applicant. No new variances will be created. Mr. Arthur Harden, Professional Architect/Planner, credentials accepted. Existing structure is an older home; last improvements approximately 20 years ago, home needs updating. Basically upgrading interior and looking for variance to build enclosed rear porch. Front yard setback measured from river side of home. Side yard requirements are 15 feet. The setbacks will be improved with the removal of some bump outs (bay window and existing balcony). Requesting area on southwest corner of home (enclose porch). Exhibit A-1 Drawing of first floor. A-3 Third floor drawing. (Finished attic; 255.7 square feet). Row of shrubbery maintained to separate property and not to block view of neighbor’s view of river. Porch will be exceeding setback by 9 feet. Looking to make it shingled siding and make it looks more like a beach house. Not really changing the roof structure; home will be raised 2-feet to improve flood elevation level. . Setback requirement on river side is 25 feet. Current appearance of home is dated. Proposed addition cannot be seen from entrance side of home. Changes to home will be aesthetically pleasing. Improvements will not have negative impact on public safety and will be compatible to existing homes in neighborhood. Proposed home will be well below allowable building coverage.

No audience questions

Peter Wolf, applicant, sworn. Has had conversations with neighbors and they are all for application; only concern was that the arborvitaes are maintained to preserve their view of the river.


Reilly – Main concern was about view and impact on neighbors and I believe that has been dealt with. Given the privacy of each of those properties I do not see any negative effect.

Wolfersberger – We have gained a little on the side of the property. The flood elevation is a plus. There are pre-existing conditions and some have been corrected slightly and the home is beautiful. I would be in favor.

Tooker – I think it is beautiful and I would be honored to have another Hardin house in town.

Motion by Mr. Reilly, second by Mrs. Tooker to approve application #2007-14 of Mary Pearce and Peter Wolf.

In favor – Simon, Reilly, Wolfersberger, Tooker and Reynolds
Opposed - None

Application #2007-11 – First Presbyterian Church; Applicant wishes to continue its educational tradition by re-introducing a weekday nursery school to the existing Christian education building similar to the school conducted in prior years. (Carried without notice)

Application#2007-15 – Frank & Christina Ranuro, 1 River Vista Lane; Block 118; Lot 3.06; Applicant wishes to construct a new single family dwelling.(Applicant requesting to be carried to December 6, 2007 without notice)

Published December07, 2007 | Board of Adjustment Minutes | 485

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