Borough of Point Pleasant Beach MINUTES
The October 6, 2005 Special Meting of the Board of Adjustment opened at 7:45pm. The clerk read the notice of compliance with the " Open Public Meetings Act." Present were Board members: Wolfersberger, Struncius, Palisi, Moberg, Cangelosi, Tooker and Dyer. Absent: Simon and Leonard
Motion by Mr. Wolfersberger, second by Mr. Struncius to approve the minutes of September 15, 2005.
Vote: Wolfersberger, Struncius, Palisi, Moberg, Cangelosi and Tooker……….Yea
Motion by Mr. Wolfersberger, second by Mr. Cangelosi to memorialize the action and vote approving application #2005-20 of Brij Mohan Sharma, 406 Richmond Avenue with conditions.
Vote: Wolfersberger, Struncius, Palisi, Moberg, Tooker and Cangelosi……….Yea
Motion by Mr. Struncius, second by Mr. Wolfersberger to memorialize the action and vote approving application #2005-19 of Anthony & Matilda Zeoli. 60 Sanborn Avenue with conditions.
Vote: Palisi, Struncius, Wolfersberger, Moberg, Cangelosi and Tooker……….Yea
Motion by Mr. Cangelosi, second by Mrs. Tooker to memorialize the action and vote approving application #2005-06 of Frank Chiaia, 1106 Ocean Avenue with conditions.
Vote: Palisi, Struncius, Moberg, Cangelosi and Tooker………………………..Yea
Opposed: Wolfersberger
Motion by Mr. Palisi, second by Mr. Struncius to memorialize the action and vote amending Application # 2004-40 of Denise Krieger 214 Yale Avenue with conditions.
Vote: Wolfersberger, Palisi, Struncius, Moberg, Cangelosi, Tooker and Dyer…. Yea
Application#2005-27, Nicola Bevaqua, 2 Broadway, Block 121, Lot 29; Applicant wishes to eliminate existing second floor decks and construct a two-story addition to existing single family dwelling.
Carmine Villani, attorney for applicant. Single story home expanded in 1987 to two-family. There is an east side deck. They used to have view of ocean, which no longer exist. Fiberglass roof with windows has had leakage problem. Scale, footprint and height of home will not change. Nicholas Bevaqua, applicant, sworn. I have repaired the roof many times. Photographs taken by Carmine Villani on 10/06/2005. Entered as A-7 Backyard, A-8 – leak in living room. A-9 Atrium. A-1- depicts windows to be covered. It was like an atrium. A-2 shows home and deck. A-3, floor plan, A-4, 7 different views of rear section of home, driveway and parking. A-5, View of Broadway towards bridge depicting Ward Realty and a-10, application and file. David Cochran, registered architect and professional planner sworn. Credentials accepted. He stated that they would be keeping the basic roofline. They will just be enclosing the decks; house will become more in character with surrounding homes. Height of home will not be increasing and will not be blocking neighbor’s light and air.
Deliberation: Palisi: We are always sensitive to increasing the intensity in that area, I think it is deminimus. I think the home is going to look nicer. Positives clearly out way the negatives. Moberg: Pictures entered as evidence show exactly where the addition will be going. It will have no impact on neighbor. Good application, in favor.
Motion by Mr. Struncius, second by Mrs. Tooker to approve Application #2005-27 with conditions.
Condition: The home is to be sided with vinyl cedar impression siding.
Vote: Wolfersberger, Struncius, Palisi, Moberg, Cangelosi, Tooker and Dyer…Yea
Application #2005-34,GCD Company c/o Candace Forbes, 220 Ocean Avenue, Block 120, Lot 7.01; Applicant wishes to construct a 6-foot fence on the side yard.
Candace Forbes, sworn. Candace explained that the neighbor’s to the North keep their property like a junkyard. Township has come down and made them clean up, but within a few weeks it is a mess again. There have been knife fights and public urination. I rent to families in the summer and no one should be subjected to this. Pictures entered as A-1 through A-5, depicting the junk in the next-door lot. There are multiple owners. I want my privacy now. I have been looking at this for years.
Audience questions: Robert Hinckley, neighbor. I listened to the testimony and I agree, but the fence will be 3 feet from my rear window. He has Pictures depicting area. Pictures taken a week ago entered as O-1 thru O-6. O-7 Skimatic. A five-foot fence would let me get a little breeze. Forbes: His property is part of the problem.
Mae Hrymack: I think it is an appropriate request. Things have not been handled and this is an adequate proposal.
Cangelosi: Would a five-foot fence be acceptable? Forbes: That would be acceptable.
Deliberations: Wolfersberger: I would be in favor. Struncius: We have a unique property, very deep property bordering 5 rental units. I am in favor. Moberg: I was ready to give you the 6-foot fence except by the gentleman’s home, but if you two are happy with 5 then that’s fine.
Motion by Mr. Cangelosi, second by Mr. Wolfersberger to approve Application#2005-34 with conditions.
Vote: Wolfersberger, Struncius, Palisi, Moberg, Cangelosi, Tooker and Dyer…Yea
Condition: Five-foot fence will be 4 feet white vinyl fence, one-foot white vinyl lattice.
Board members Moberg and Tooker have stepped down from Application #2005-12
Application #2005-12, First Baptist Church, Applicant wishes to construct a new building to provide the Church with classroom space in the lower level and a Multi-purpose room with kitchen facilities in the upper level. (Carried without notice)
Albert Barnes requested that it be put on the record that he has a number of questions for Reverend Helm. Reverend Helm was not able to attend this meeting due to prior obligations. Mr. Barnes questioned if Mr. Geller’s previous testimony would be withdrawn due to the fact that he is not available for questions. Mr. Pardes replied that they might do that since Mr. Burdick is the engineer. After discussion Mr. Pardes withdrew Mr. Geller’s testimony and Mr. Burdick addressed the engineer’s letter, point by point. Burdick: The plan proposes 55% impervious coverage, which is much less than what other zones permit. We believe the project meets the positive criteria. Negative-Loss of yard and open space, noise, minimal impact. Facility will not be used too frequently. Proposed parking will increase safety. Wolfersberger: When you keep changing the plans, won’t that affect the appearance. Mr. Palisi: We do not have an architectural drawing to go by. I do not like to approve anything on an assumption. Mr. Burdick does not feel a traffic report is necessary. I do not think capacity will ever be realized. Palisi: The parish has increased through the years. This new facility holds 50% more, and you say it is not going to increase the traffic. Pardes: No one can guarantee that the church will not grow. Burdick: We can supply a traffic report. Cangelosi: A visual aid would let us visualize how the traffic would flow in and out. Palisi: The intensity of the structure is way more than a single family home. Burdick: We hope the church will grow. I do not think that these things will affect things now. Struncius: We have a lot of massing now. Now we are talking that behind it we will have this giant box. I have not heard why we need this much space. Dyer: I know this is to increase certain functions. Now you are having a larger impact. Mr. Savacool: Wanted make sure the board understood that the parking is based on 9′ x 18′ parking spaces not 10′ x 20′. Dennis Galvin questions Mr. Burdick where they consider the rear yard setback to be. The lot is "L" shaped and he questioned why they considered the "L" portion behind the manse the rear yard.
Audience Questions:
Albert Barnes, Grove St., his questions referred to setbacks and bulk variances.
John Gelson, Orchard Avenue. "Are you really suggesting that this proposed structure will decrease parking on McLean Avenue? Have you ever looked at the parking on McLean Avenue on a Sunday" Have you done any study on how it will affect the Library? Your proposal is that 27 parking spaces will accommodate 287 people?
John Butow, Grove Street, Questions size of structure and square footage.
Mr. Struncius: I feel the applicant has not given adequate testimony for the need for the size of the building. It is almost a huge open gymnasium. The massing of it is the main negative thing. Your main reason is that you want to have dinner together. I have not had a chance to digest what I feel about moving the manse and the parking. I am not comfortable turning the corner and seeing that. The church is allowed to improve. I want to see some revised drawings. Wolfersberger: I agree 100%. Dyer: You are saying the maximum is 150 people. Maybe the building should be for that amount of people. Wolfersberger: That 20 hour usage would have to be consistent. You know once the building is there it will be used Palisi: Mr. Barnes made an excellent observation that the building would be 80 feet long. It will impact the look of the neighborhood. Cangelosi: We will be looking for detailed landscaping renderings and proposed exterior lighting.
Motion by Mr. Struncius, second by Mr. Wolfersberger to carry Application #2005-12 to December 15, 2005 without notice.
Vote: Wolfersberger, Struncius, Palisi, Tooker and Dyer……………………….Yea
Opposed: None
Meeting adjourned at 10:50pm.
