Borough of Point Pleasant Beach Minutes
April 19, 2018 BOA Minutes
The April 19, 2018 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. Reynolds, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Davis, Ms. Crasper, Mr. McGee and Chairman Struncius
Absent – Reilly, Schneider and DePolo
Also present – Dennis Galvin, Ray Savacool and Karen Mills
Denise Sweet – court Reporter
Motion by Mr. Davis, second by Mr. Dixon to memorialize the minutes of February 15, 2018
In favor: Reynolds, Dixon, Davis and Struncius
Opposed: None
Motion by Mr. Davis, second by Mr. Reynolds to memorialize the minutes of March 15, 2018
In favor: Reynolds, Dixon, Davis and Struncius
Opposed: None
Oath of Office – Michael McGee – Administered by Dennis Galvin, Esq.
Memorialize resolutions
Motion by Mr. Davis second by Mr. Reynolds to memorialize the action and vote denying Application #2018-12 – David Barra – Denial – 126 Ocean Ave
In favor: Kelly Reynolds and Davis
Opposed: None
Motion by Mr. Dixon, second by Mr. Reynolds to memorialize the action and vote approving application #2018-09 of Steven Lefkowitz – 106 South Baltimore with conditions
In favor: Kelly, Reynolds, Dixon and Struncius
Opposed: None
Motion by Mr. Dixon, second by Mr. Reynolds to memorialize the action and vote approving application #2018-02 – William/Jill Jackson- 4A Inlet Drive with conditions –
In favor: Kelly, Reynolds, Dixon and Struncius
Opposed: None
etter – Extension of Resolution #2016-08 – Godwin Family Properties LLC (Point Lobster) – Still waiting on Cafra Permits
Motion by Mr. Reynolds, second by Mr. Davis to grant a one year extension to Godwin Family Properties, LLC.
In favor: Spader, Kelly, Reynolds, Dixon, Davis, Crasper and Struncius
Opposed: None
Application #2018-10 – Bernard Michalski – 119 Trenton Avenue – Block 81; Lot 20 – Applicant would like to erect a removable pool in the rear yard.
Dave Michalski reviewed his application and stated that the pool would be able to be centered to eliminate side yard variance. He clarified that this is a removable pool and is put up seasonally. Dennis Galvin stated that if this was a permanent structure you would have room for concern but since it is removable that alleviates some concern. Chairman Struncius inquired if there is pool fencing. Mr. Dixon feels that pool fencing should be installed even though it is an above ground pool for safety. Dave Michalski stated that there is a safety netting that actually attached to the pool and would be safer than fencing. Mr. Reynolds inquired if centering the pool would be detrimental to their outdoor space. (No) Mr. Dixon inquired where they backwash the pool. (The lake) Dennis Galvin stated that is a DEP violation – back wash must be redirected to the street.
No audience questions
Deliberations
Spader – Bottom line has no objections with conditions in place.
Kelly – Has no objections with
Reynolds – nothing to add
Dixon – Everything has been addressed
Davis – In agreement – it is an above ground pool
Crasper – no objections
McGee – No objections
Struncius – We have agreement to bring it 10 feet off property line and fencing to make it safer. It is also a catch basin and down part of the year.
Conditions
1. Pool must be taken down each season and cannot be up before May or after October.
2. Pool must be 10 feet from side yards.
3. Applicant is to provide a pool compliant fence.
Motion by Mr. Spader, second by Mr. Kelly to approve application #2018-10 of Bernard Michalski – 119 Trenton Avenue – Block 81; Lot 20 – with conditions
In favor: Spader, Kelly, Reynold, Dixon, Davis, Crasper and Struncius
Opposed: None
Application approved with conditions
Application #2018-11 – 401 – 405 Investors, LLC (Storino/Sprint) – Block 210.0; Lot 4 – Applicant wishes to install rooftop telecommunications microcell facility on Boardwalk Bar and Grill Building on Boardwalk.
Mr. McGee and Ms. Crasper have stepped down from this application.
Judy Fairweather, Esq. attorney for applicant reviewed application.
Devon Joseph, sworn, licensed radio frequency Engineer. Has appeared previously before boards in Mt. Olive, Hackettstown and Wall. Credentials accepted. Mr. Davis questioned that there is a statute that states a municipality cannot keep a telecommunications company from installing equipment that provides service so he would like to know why they are before the board. Judy Fairweather wonders that also. Dennis Galvin said there was a case where it was proved a telecommunication company did not have a gap. Exhibit A-3 – Colorized radio frequency coverage map. Devon Joseph reviewed the coverage map and explained where the coverage gap is. Mr. Davis inquired why coverage is so bad with the tower at the bridge. (That tower has old technology.)Devon Joseph explained the search area was the boardwalk.
Joseph Hanrahan, Professional Engineer Jackson, Brick and Toms River, credentials accepted, reviewed the site plan and explained installation.
No audience questions
David Karlbach, Professional Planner, credentials accepted, reviewed variances required (Use and site plan approval), described surrounding area and reviewed Board Engineer’s letter. Planner described this is not uncommon in the area, Verizon has an antennae approximately a block away. This is a privately owned site so a use variance is required. It complies with all requirements except that the cabinet is located on a roof top that is less than 48 square feet. This macro site is small. There all no buildings higher than 35 feet permitted anywhere in the Borough. Reviewed required proofs. Ray Savacool inquired if the site is accessible to anyone or is there some type of lock out. (There is a lock out) Mr. Reynolds inquired what prevents us from getting multiple antennae on the roof. (They would need to come before the board) Antennae will not interfere with police communications.
No audience questions
Audience comments
Mr. Gearhart, 5 Harvard Avenue. – Use to have Sprint service – never had service that is why I switched companies – so I think this will help.
Condition
1. Access to the roof is to be by means of a locked ladder only.
Deliberations
Spader – No objections – is there a color for the antennae – off white
Kelly – If your house in on fire and you cannot call the local police and you do not have coverage that can be a problem. Like the idea of it being commercial because you are not tearing up our water tower.
Reynolds – It has been established that we need the coverage.
Dixon – It passes the local ordinances and the coverage is needed.
Davis – they proved the need for coverage and updated technology and we are not getting a standalone tower in the parking lot. This will be invisible to 99% of the population. Nothing objectionable about it.
Struncius – Obviously you had all proofs and everything in line. The gap is being covered and this is a use that is a no brainer. Aesthetically this will not bother anyone. Deminimus in size and not taking up any footprint.
Motion by Mr. Dixon, second by Mr. Reynolds to approve application #2018-11 of 401 – 405 Investors, LLC (Storino/Sprint) – Block 210.0; Lot 4 with conditions
In favor: Spader, Kelly, Reynolds, Dixon, Davis and Struncius
Opposed: None
Application approved with conditions
Application #2017-22 – Ocean Avenue. Partners, LLC – 149 Ocean Avenues – Block 149; Lot 25 – Applicant wishes to demolish two existing single family dwelling units and create off street parking. Application carried without notice from January 18, 2018.
John Dixon has stepped down from this application.
Ms. Crasper and Mr. McGee have returned to the dais.
John Jackson attorney for applicant. John Jackson reviewed previous meetings and where the application is at now. He reviewed the land use reasons that it should be approved and now only 6 cars will be parked and it will be recorded by deed restriction. Stated that the Council approved the curb cut.
Power Point presentation will give an overview of application. He referenced all the similar parking lots in the area. Referenced how close the existing roofs are now and cited the safety concerns. Shows six stacked parking spaces and will not be utilizing existing easement until the parking lot use is abandoned. Also proposing 20 foot curb cut that is a safety enhancement that will have to be modified by council. They will not be abandoning the easement in case a house is ever put back on the lot. Ray Savacool recommends an 18 foot curb cut to save a parking space and would minimize the impact on the neighbor to the north.
Margaret Windrem, one on the applicants sworn, has been a resident for 9 seasons. She lives at the top of Hayes court. Property purchased is right across the street from Hayes Court. They knew they did not have parking when purchasing her property. She reviewed the similar lots in her neighborhood. The one lot on bowling green parks 14 cars and is next to residential homes. There is another lot on Franklin and Pilgrim Pathway which are much bigger and they rent spaces. Once I get here I am on foot or on my bicycle – I fill up my car at the beginning of summer and still have gas at the end of summer. Chairman Struncius questioned if those lots are approved parking and someday if someone builds a house they might disappear. John Jackson stated that they just want to show that they are common in the neighborhood. She stated that the neighbors usually park on the street and do not move their car. As of right now there are 5 parking lots like this. Dennis Galvin inquired why we are talking about them; we do not know if they are legal; we can only look at what is in front of us. Mr. Kelly stated that he know some of them are not legal. Chairman Struncius stated that the cars backing out of these lots is what creates congestion on Ocean Avenue in the summer. John Jackson replied that the traffic is crawling anyway for many reasons. Slide #9 is the property that they wish to tear down. The roofs are about 6 inches apart; it would be difficult to walk between the houses. They were looking for a non-conforming property that it would make sense; this property is dangerous and the homes are old. Margaret Windrem had discussions with a number of neighbors; one neighbor was concerned but he agrees this would be a better use for the property. Margaret Windrem has no problem with conditions. Mr. Spader inquired if any of the homes on their lane has parking. (No) Ray Savacool inquired if she had called JCP & L in reference to moving the utility pole. (No)
Audience questions
Johanna Pasciuto, 122ARandall Avenue – inquired why Margaret Windrem never reached out to her and her husband. (Her understanding from last meeting was that she was not in favor and your property is not adjacent). Johanna said she will see the lot from her deck.
Dennis Galvin said the Board has to decide if this is a better use than what exist.
James Giordano, Professional Engineer/Planner, sworn, reviewed the site plan and what would need to be done to convert to a driveway. James Giordano believes the driveway can work; he drove down Ocean Avenue and counted 17 driveways where people back out. Chairman Struncius inquired if the Master Plan wants us to tear down homes for parking lots. James Giordano agreed that might not be exactly what the plan wants but they do want more parking, but there is a way to accomplish that objective. John Jackson reminded the Board that the governing body approved commercial lots to provide parking after hours. John Jackson reminded the Board that they are not looking to put a commercial lot in. Mr. Kelly wondered why the owners didn’t consider building one home with 6 parking spaces. Ray Savacool inquired if a chain will be placed on the lot if unoccupied. Margaret Windrem replied that they will if the board directs them to.
Audience questions
Robert Dixon – 147 Ocean Avenue – inquired where the telephone pole would be moved to. James Giordano replied that it would be moved south. Robert Dixon inquired what the town requires for a parking lot. Dennis Galvin replied that there are no standards for a stand-alone parking lot in this zone. Robert Dixon inquired if the easement is not being used if the front of the easement can be used as a parking spot.
Kathryn Maynard, applicant sworn, stated that her and Scott have owned the home on Hayes Court for 44 years. They have always been looking for opportunities to secure parking. Margaret took the lead and we have gotten as far as we have and would appreciate the board voting in favor.
Audience comments
Robert Dixon, 147 Ocean Avenue, sworn, stated that he heard a lot of talk about how it is going to benefit this family. I also have a family house on the boardwalk with no parking. I think the value of my home on Ocean Avenue is going to decrease. I think this is going to be an eye sore and noisy. I am against it – they are going to be jockeying around cars and there is nothing that is going to stop the cars from driving through my house. As far as stacking the cars at 6 deep and then moving them around to get the front car out will create havoc. I have been here my entire life and they will park on the street and then leave this parking lot for family and friends. I think it is a negative for the neighborhood and does not benefit the town. John Jackson inquired if he was a Professional Planner. (No)
Mr. Gearhart, 5 Harvard Avenue, sworn, has lived there for 6/7 years right next to the easement. Can only fit a very small car up the easement. Has had to replace his fence 5 times from people with large cars trying to open their door and damaging his fence. One year the renter’s Tiki torch caught the fence on fire. The rear home is really a garage and is 3 inches from my property line. If there is a fire his home will catch fire in a minute. There is another house that is only one foot away so if there is a fire both our houses will also go. So if anyone wants to take that house down please do it. Would rather have a driveway then at least there is an open space. I can never have my windows open because of the party house and the language. Rentals of this type create disturbances between the noise and the language.
Johanna Pasciuto, 122ARandall Avenue – My husband and I have been coming down for years and I do know that parking is at a premium. My house is almost behind this driveway. I am renting it now but by next year it will be my permanent residence. I do not want to sit on my deck and look at a parking lot. I am asking as a taxpayer to really consider not approving this. These two people knew when they bought they would not have parking. (John Jackson offered to plant trees (buffering) Johanna Pasciuto stated that it might be OK if someone is here to water them and take care of them).
Patrick Gibson, 5 Hayes Court, sworn – He is support of this application. Has known the family for more years than he wants to admit. If they say the parking is just for them – it is. These houses are eye sores and they are doing everything they can to address the neighbors concerns.
Karen Golden, 9 Hayes Court, sworn – Rebuilt their home on Hayes Court 10 years ago – we used to have an Ocean view but we don’t any longer – because the house next to us was built high. We spent a fortune rebuilding but you just except what happens. I ride around and around to find a parking space. A lot of these houses have gone up in the area and now the curb cuts have eliminated a lot of parking spaces. I see all those wires between those house and they are lucky there hasn’t been a fire. These people are so nice and helpful and will be used for what they are saying. I would prefer seeing them get parking.
John Jackson would like to carry the application to wait for 7 members to deliberate and vote. John Jackson waived the time for the application to be heard.
Motion by Mr. Spader second by Mr. Davis to carry application #2017-22 – Ocean Avenue. Partners, LLC – 149 Ocean Avenues –without notice to May 17, 2018 without notice.
In favor: Spader, Kelly, Reynolds, Davis,
Crasper and Struncius
Opposed: None
Meeting adjourned at 10:45pm
Attest: Karen L. Mills, Clerk of the Board
