October 20, 2005

MINUTES

The October 20, 2005 Regular meeting of the Board of Adjustment was opened at 7:40pm. The clerk read the notice of compliance with the "Open Public Meetings Act". Present were Board members: Simon, Wolfersberger, Struncius, Moberg, Cangelosi, Tooker, Leonard and Dyer. Absent: Palisi

Motion by Mr. Wolfersberger, second by Mr. Cangelosi to approve the minutes of October 6, 2005 Special BOA meeting.

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

Motion by Mr. Wolfersberger, second by Mrs. Tooker to memorialize the action and vote approving Application #2005-27 of Nicola Bavaqua, 2 Broadway with conditions.

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

Applicant #2005-11, Francis Rodman Rupp,Esq., 105 Baltimore Avenue, Block 154, Lot 10; Applicant wishes to construct a new single family dwelling. (Carried without notice) Donald R. Ambrose, attorney for applicant. William Senkel, principal of corporation, sworn. Requesting variance for setback requirement. Applicant did submit revised plans that added some windows that would make the side of the home facing Baltimore Avenue more aesthetically pleasing. Struncius: The full extent of the changes is the windows. Ambrose: Correct. Mr. Moberg: Said he had recollected the board requesting the applicant give consideration to the home facing Baltimore instead of Sanborn Avenue. Ambrose: The applicant had considered it, but the lot is too narrow. Wolfersberger: If you left the last meeting without the impression that we were concerned about the house facing Baltimore you were wrong. David G. Paulus, builder, sworn, Statewide custom modular homes. With Mr. Wolfersbergers comments, it makes it quite easy for me to propose a reasonably simple change. I would consider putting a front door by the stairwell. Any area where there are two windows would give me access to putting a sliding door. Adding a porch would also improve the character. Whatever size porch the Board allows. I also request being able to cover the porch. Struncius: I do think the overall shape is the issue. If it were as simple as adding windows we would have been out of here last meeting. Everyone is entitled to building the house they want to build, but I do think it needs do be broken up in some way. I do think it is something we will visually need to see. I do not think it needs to be a complete porch across the front; it could be some form of patio entry porch. I am in favor of creating some kind of aesthetic value. Wolfersberger: I agree. You might consider an alternate plan and not have the steps in front; they could be moved to the side. Paulus: The square footage of the home is approximately 17,600. Struncius: What I am after is creating some visual character. Galvin: I think the board has been reasonable, they can only give you so much guidance. Moberg: This is going to be a rental? Amborse: yes, at first, ultimately Mr. Senkel is looking to live here. Wolfersberger: I am not opposed to going 5 feet on the side since it is a corner lot. I think you will use the property better if you use the property longer. Struncius: I think A-2 is a better representation of what we are looking for. Moberg: That is the consensus of the board. Abrose: Thanked the board. We didn’t totally get what the problem was. We will come back and we do understand what you are looking for.

Motion by Mr. Wolfersberger, second by Mr. Struncius to carry Application #2005-11 to November 3, 2005 without notice.

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

Application #2005-24, Peter & Dyan Heineck, 610 Trenton Avenue, Block 72, Lot 20; Applicant wishes to extend existing porch to square off house. Peter C. Heineck, sworn, explained that he wants to extend existing porch to wrap around porch. It will remain an open porch. Packet of pictures taken today entered as A-2. He explained that the proposed addition is already completed. Mr. Dyer commented that he believes the percentage of building coverage is less than documented. Struncius: Do you believe that the porch will let the home be more functional? Heineck: I think so, if you can see the wood door, we are going to screen that in. Moberg: No negative impact. Heineck: No

No audience questions

Deliberations

Struncius: One thing I appreciate is the clear package you submitted. Not blocking light/aesthetically pleasing. In favor Wolfersberger: I agree. In favor Mrs. Tooker: This is one of those no brainers. In favor Moberg: When you get an application like this it makes it really easy. Definite benefit to the community. In favor

Motion by Mr. Struncius, second by Mr. Leonard to approve application 2005-24 with conditions. 1. It is to remain an open porch
2. Do not exceed current steps.

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

Application #2005-15, Marie Lauletta, 76 Inlet Drive, Block 176, Lot 7 partial 8; Applicant wishes to create a full two-story to existing two-family dwelling by raising roof & cantilever 2nd story over existing porch and square off porch on first floor.

Motion by Mr. Wolfersberger, second by Mr. Cangelosi to carry application #2005-15 to March 16, 2006 without notice.

Application # 2005-21, Nilsa Roth, 113 Atlantic Avenue, Block 63, Lot 7; Applicant wishes to add small gazebo type structure to front porch and in-ground swimming pool in rear yard. Jack Eric Roth, sworn. Nilsa Roth, sworn. Pictures taken 3 months ago showing front corner of home and rear of home, entered as A-2. Leonard: Comments that the front setback listed is in reference to the existing house. That does not include what the distance to the gazebo will be. That will be less. The drawings do not show how far the gazebo will be coming into the front setback. Nilsa Roth: It is not going more than 5 feet. Dyer: It also looks like you have 5 steps. Nilsa Roth: The gazebo will not come out further than the steps. Struncius: It is hard when you do not get to see it. The intent is to keep the architectural tie-in. Cangelosi: We do not know what type of roof structure will cover it. Simon: Are you opening the whole porch? Nilsa Roth: No, just in front. Picture entered as A-3, being submitted just for the look of the roof. Moberg: Lets move on to the swimming facilities. Leonard: If you add a four-foot cement apron around the pool then the setback will be just one-foot. Nilsa Roth: We were thinking 2.5-foot cement apron. Wolfersberger: We can fix this easily moving the pool 10-feet of the fence. You will still have 21-feet for entertainment. Moberg: We are going to
eliminate the need for a pool variance. Struncius: I want to see something usually. Cangelosi: I am in favor of your concept but I don’t feel comfortable not seeing it. Struncius: If everyone agrees you come back and we take a quick look at the drawings. Moberg: We should also know the setbacks. We have decided on the pool and the equipment. Wolfersberger: We just want to see it before we approve it.
No audience questions.

Motion by Mr. Leonard, second by Mr. Struncius to carry application #2005-21 to December 15, 2005 without notice

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

Application #2005-23, Linda & Tom Sullivan, 221 Baltimore Avenue, Block 126, Lot 3.01; Applicant wishes to demolish existing family dwelling & construct a new single family dwelling with a 14′ x 20′ in-ground swimming pool. Robert Civile, attorney for applicant. He introduced the Sullivan family. Present home is 900 square feet. In terms of the design of the house it will be in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. Galvin: We really need to hear why a new home cannot comply with the building coverage. Civile: They are bringing the home up to code to accommodate a family of four. Leonard: A family of four cannot live in a home that covers 30%? From my point of view you have a clean slate. There are certain demands. If you reduce the home 1-foot in length and 1-foot in width you would comply. The home is too massive for a postage stamp size property. Dyer: With a clean slate we are looking at 5-variances. If we do away with a couple it would help. Civile: We would like the opportunity to get the house down to 30% and just come back for the pool.

No audience questions:

Motion by Mr. Leonard, second by Mrs. Tooker to carry application #2005-23 to January 19, 2006 without notice.

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

Mr. Leonard has stepped down off Application #2005-25

Application #2005-25, Richard & Jane McDonnell, 208 Elizabeth Avenue, Block 13.05, Lot 3; Applicant wishes to renovate existing single family dwelling and add a partial second floor addition. Richard C. McDonnell, applicant. Home at present is not suitable for year round occupancy. Electric heaters heat home and there is no central air. The kitchen is too small for a dishwasher. Greg Cox, licensed professional planner and architect, sworn. Moberg: His credentials are perfect. Mr. Cox reviewed renderings. Home height will remain at 22-feet. Large deck in rear will be made smaller. Rear addition will be built over that area and a small outside living space will remain in the exterior. Mr. Dyer: Are all the variances you are requesting pre-existing. Mr. Mc Donnell: For the most part, yes. The only new variance is the second floor dormer. Mr. Dyer: You are not changing the footprint? Mr. McDonnell: No Simon: The only increase in the non-conformities is the two dormers? Mr. Cox: We are not changing the porch or stairs. We are adding an addition in the rear. Being a corner lot we have the two frontages. We are taking down the large deck in the rear and putting the addition there. Then we are having a smaller deck. We are trying to conform to the existing architecture. We will not be exceeding the existing ridge height. We want to keep that low look to the home because we like it. That addition will let us expand the kitchen. The ridge height is 22 feet.

No audience questions

Deliberations: Dyer: I think this is a beautiful home. You need to add heating and air conditioning. Great addition, in favor. Moberg: Changes be made will benefit the community and neighborhood. Home will be brought up to code. No negative impact. Struncius: You integrated the addition and kept character. Nice aesthetic value.

Motion by Mr. Wolfersberger, second by Mr. Dyer to approve Application 2005-25.

Vote: Simon, Wolfersberger, Struncius, Moberg, Cangelosi, Tooker and Dyer.
Opposed: None

Meeting adjourned 10:08pm