April 21, 2005

MINUTES

The April 21, 2005 Regular Board of Adjustment meeting opened at 7:40pm. The clerk read the notice of compliance with the "Open Public Meetings Act". Present were Board members: Moberg, Wolfersberger, Simon, Palisi, Cangelosi and Tooker Alternate members: Leonard and Dyer Absent: Struncius

Motion by Mr. Leonard, second by Mr. Wolfersberger to approve the minutes of April 7, 2005 meeting.

Vote: Simon, Moberg, Palisi, Cangelosi, Wolfersberger, Tooker, and Leonard…Yea
Opposed: None

Motion by Mr. Cangelosi, second by Mr. Palisi to memorialize application #2004-21 of James and Collie Marsetti of 1505 St. Louis Avenue with conditions.

Vote: Simon, Moberg, Wolfersberger, Cangelosi, Palisi, Tooker and Leonard…Yea
Opposed: None

Motion by Mr. Leonard, second by Mr. Palisi to memorialize application #2004-52 of Kenneth Poray of 705 Ocean Avenue with conditions.

Vote: Simon, Moberg, Wolfersberger, Cangelosi, Palisi, Tooker and Leonard…Yea
Opposed: None

Motion by Mr. Simon to approve resolution 2005-77, (2004 BOA Yearly report) second by Mr. Leonard.

Vote: Simon, Moberg, Wolfersberger, Cangelosi, Palisi, Tooker and Leonard
Opposed: None

Motion by Mr. Leonard, second by Mr. Wolfersberger to carry application #2004-49 of Angelo Danza to June 16, 2005 without notice.

Vote: Simon, Moberg, Wolfersberger, Palisi, Cangelosi, Tooker and Leonard…Yea
Opposed: None

APPLICATION #2004-33,DEBBIE YORIO, 1101 BALTIMORE AVENUE, BLOCK 31, Lot 19; Applicant wishes to construct a 10′ x 16′ storage shed. (Carried without notice) After lengthy discussion with Mr. Yorio about the placement of his shed, Mr. Yorio decided to withdraw his application and to go with the shed that is allowed within the zoning ordinance.

Motion by Mr. Cangelosi, second by Mr. Leonard to allow Mr. Yorio to withdraw his application without prejudice.

Vote: Simon, Moberg, Wolfersberger, Palisi, Cangelosi, Tooker and Leonard…Yea
Opposed: None

Application withdrawn without
prejudice.

Mr. Struncius arrived at 7:50pm.

APPLICATION # 2005-02, JOHN ALEFFI, 108 CENTRAL AVENUE, BLOCK 98, LOT 16; Applicant wishes to add 8′ x 8′ covered porch to existing covered porch.

Motion by Mr. Leonard, second by Mr. Wolfersberger to carry application#2005-02 to May 19, 2005 without notice.

CARRIED WITHOUT NOTICE TO May 19, 2005

APPLICATION #2005-05, ANTHONY RICCIO, 303 WASHINGTON AVENUE, BLOCK 25, LOT 2; Applicant wishes to move front door, remove garage door and add a roof top deck. Peter Kearns, attorney for applicant. The applicant would like to enclose exterior entrance way and make it interior space. Then they would like to extend the second floor deck over the addition. Mr. Simon inquired where the line for the front door would be. Mr. Kearns replied that the front door would be located where one of the two front steps would be. Mr. Struncius asked if they had plans that showed the location. Mr. Kearns replied that they did not. Mr. Wolfersberger questioned the percentage of lot coverage that was listed on the application. Mr. Kearns said he figured the lot coverage of the home to be 27.69%. Mr. Kearns presented pictures entered as A-2. Pictures showed home as is. Mr. Wolfersberger commented that the curve of the front stairs go beyond the front wall of the home. Mr. Palisi inquired if the impervious coverage was 70.6%. Did this Board approve 70.6%? Mr. Riccio replied that the house has been this way for 18 years. Mr. Galvin inquired if they were expanding impervious coverage. Mr. Dyer said we could only go by the drawings in front of us. We are getting some obscure numbers on some definitive things. We have a situation where we have to know the math. The premise of what I see I am comfortable with from a standpoint of aesthetics. Property is well kept and I am sure improvements are deminimus, but numbers are important. We cannot answer the questions about what is changing. From my standpoint I am uncomfortable. The numbers are important. Mr. Palisi: Can we go by these numbers on this application? Mr. Galvin: What would it hurt to wait and get some statistical data. Mr. Palisi: From the view of this proposed deck, are there any windows on your neighbor’s side. You would not be able to see in their home? This is from a privacy standpoint. Picture entered as A-3 shows the house to the right. Mr. Moberg: Refers to A-2. Could you have Mr. Riccio state what will be leaving as far as greenery? Mr. Riccio: Nothing, it is just landing. Mr. Simon: It looks like they are going from 52.4% to 54.3% lot increase. That is steps and the little bit of building. Mr. Moberg: With Mr. Simon’s expertise, he believes the numbers are accurate, that they fly pretty well. Walter A. Miller, builder, sworn. Mr. Palisi: The two concerns are building coverage and impervious coverage. Do you have any idea what the calculations are? Mr. Miller: I can only tell you what the approximate addition will be. The circular stairs will bump out about a foot and a half from where the existing is. The existing stairs are actually set back on the house. The pavers are actually set on top of concrete. Mr. Palisi: All those figures that we just discussed are not correct? Mr. Miller: The stairs will actually start one foot behind the front of the house. Mr. Leonard: We previously heard that it was only coming out to the end of where the steps were. Now it is coming out to the edge of the house. Mr. Cangelosi: Have you endeavored to get an architect. A-4 entered, modified survey. Mr. Miller: I marked out where the new entry is going to come forward to and covered porch will extend to and where the stairs will exceed. Mr. Leonard: What happens to the garage, if it is not a garage anymore. Mr. Kearns: It is used for storage. Mr. Galvin: There is merit in Mr. Leonard’s concerns and we need to address it. Mr. Kearns: Mr. Riccio, when was the last time you used the garage? Mr. Riccio: 18 years ago. Mr. Riccio stated that the room would just be used for storage. Mr. Palisi: Now tell me, you are going to have two big beautiful windows to look into your storage. Mr. Riccio: That’s right. Mr. Palisi inquired if there was a way they could add in that the garage would not be a finished room. Mr. Galvin: You are changing the nature of that space. Maybe the building department did not see it that way. Maybe the home is exempt. Do you know what the base flood elevation is? Mr. Kearns: No, we do not. Mr. Palisi: Then they need to come back. Mr. Kearns: Tony wants to extend the porch and stairs. Mr. Dyer: I think it is 55.2%, if we approve 55.2% and it is less it’s better. Mr. Riccio: Is it permissible to put a window on a garage? Mr. Cangelosi: Yes, but once you remove the door it isn’t a garage anymore. It can’t be a garage if you can’t get a car in there anymore. Mr. Dyer: Our concern is that once it is not a garage anymore it might have to adhere to flood elevations. Mr. Galvin: The fact that we are changing the use of the garage is something we should look into. Mr. Palisi: We can approve the 54.3%, and you have to make it fit. Mr. Dyer: I would suggest saying that we are not approving any change in the garage. Mr. Galvin: I would recommend to say that subject to confirmation by the Building Department that the conversion of the garage to home space does not require a variance in the flood hazard regulations. Mr. Wolfersberger: The two front steps are counted in the 52.4%. The change is deminimus. Mr. Struncius: We are trying to figure this out and it is painful. Mr. Moberg: I agree with Mr. Wolfersberger. I believe we have enough information to vote on this.

Audience Questions – None

Any Other Board Questions – None

Mr. Kearns: Change in deminimus. We are just changing exterior space to interior space. Front walls will be uniformed and more aesthetically pleasing and more consistent to neighboring homes. I do apologize for the inconsistencies. Our calculations are not right to the decimal but they are close.

Deliberations:

Mr. Struncius: The two story dwelling is 28% adding 2% brings living structure to 30%. Rest of percentages are pre-existing impervious coverage that is low to ground, we tend to look at that favorably. Overall changes minimal to front elevation. Nice aesthetic change. I do not see an over intense deck use that could be negative upon neighbors. We will heighten our sensitivity on the garage issues back to the building department. The garage will not be part of this application. Overall I am in favor Mr. Palisi: I agree with Mr. Struncius. This board traditionally frowns on front yard decks, but as we saw in the photographs it will not affect the neighbor’s privacy. I am in favor. Mr. Moberg: Increase in coverage is quite minimal. No impact at all on the surrounding homes. All the improvements will be aesthetically pleasing.

Close Deliberations:

Motion by Mr. Struncius, second by Mr. Cangelosi to approve application #2005-5 with the following conditions.

1. Subject to confirmation by the Building Department that the conversion of the garage to home space does not require a variance under the flood hazard regulations.
2. Building coverage is not to exceed 54.3%, impervious coverage not to exceed 70.6%

Vote: Simon, Moberg, Wolfersberger, Cangelosi, Struncius, Palisi and Tooker….Yea
Opposed: None

Application approved with conditions

APPLICATION #2005-09, WALTER A. MILLER, INC., 215 WASHINGTON STREET, BLOCK26, LOT 8; Applicant wishes to extend porch by 1.2 feet and add a roof to the entire porch. Walter A. Miller, contractor for applicant sworn. John Freda, applicant sworn. Mr. Miller explained that he is adding a second story and they want to extend the porch to 6′ x 20′. After the porch is completed the impervious coverage will actually come down. Will be removing asphalt driveway and replacing it with pavers. Existing impervious coverage is 58.1%, when project is completed, impervious will come down to 53.2%. Mr. Struncius inquired if the sides of the porch will be enclosed. Mr. Miller replied that they would remain open. 8 pages of pictures of home entered as A-4. Mr. Struncius: The construction project is underway and you only need the one variance. Mr. Miller: That is correct. Zoning approved the plans with the condition that we come before the board and get approval for the porch. Mr. Palisi: The house coverage is 18.13%. Mr. Palisi: House coverage, even with the addition is about 18.6%. Mr. Miller: House coverage is now 18.13%, with porch being covered it will be 18.45%.

Any Audience Questions – None
Mr. Wolfersberger: We are here because we want to add one step to the porch? Mr. Miller: One foot is needed to add the columns. Mr. Wolfersberger: Did someone inquire if the increase to the porch would put the home farther in front of the other houses? Mr. Miller: The answer is it will be just about equal with the other homes. Mr. Moberg: And it is an open porch? Mr. Miller: Yes Mr. Galvin: Do you think the home will be attractive once completed. Mr. Freda: Without a doubt. Mr. Galvin: Will this have any negative impact on surrounding property owners? Mr. Freda: Not at all. Mr. Galvin: Do you think this front setback will be consistent with the neighborhood, as your builder has testified. Mr. Freda: Yes I do.

Open Deliberations:

Mr. Struncius: I think this is a minimal impact. It is very aesthetically pleasing, it is an open porch, and you are also removing some impervious coverage. I am fully in favor. Mr. Palisi: I agree with Mr. Struncius. It is absolutely beautiful. It is a wonderful addition. The overages are deminimus. It is a significant improvement to what existed. Mr. Wolfersberger: Even though I go crazy with this 1% here and there, the home is only 18.45%. The fact is I think it will be an improvement. Understandably I would vote in favor of this application.

Close Deliberations

Motion by

Mr. Palisi, second by Mr. Cangelosi to approve application #2005-09 with conditions.

Conditions: 1. Subject that the building department is not requiring a drainage and grading plan.

Vote: Simon, Palisi, Moberg, Wolfersberger, Struncius, Cangelosi and Tooker…Yea
Opposed: None

Application approved with conditions

Board closed for Executive Session

Meeting adjourned at 9:55pm

April 21, 2005 Attest: Karen L. Mills
Clerk of the Board