Borough of Point Pleasant Beach MINUTES
The September 1, 2005 Special Meeting of the 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: Wolfersberger, Simon, Moberg, Cangelosi, and Tooker. Absent: Dyer, Palisi and Leonard.
Motion by Wolfersberger, second by Simon to approve the minutes of July 21, 2005.
Vote: Wolfersberger, Simon, Moberg, Cangelosi and Tooker……………….Yea
Motion by Wolfersberger, second by Tooker to approve the minutes of August 18, 2005.
Vote: Wolfersberger, Simon, Moberg, Cangelosi and Tooker……………….Yea
Motion by Wolfersberger, second by Cangelosi to carry application #2005-12, First Baptist Church to October 6, 2005 without notice.
Vote: Wolfersberger, Simon, Moberg, Cangelosi and Tooker………………….Yea
Application 2005-06, Frank Chiaia, White Sands Hotel, 1100-08 Ocean Avenue, Block 29.01, Lot 1; Applicant enlarged existing rooms on first floor by adding a 9’5" x 19′ addition. Two rooms on the second floor were also enlarged with a 12′ 9" x 23′ 6" addition & rooftop terrace/deck. A roofed storage area was constructed between building 300 and 400. (Carried without notice).
Bob Shea, attorney for the applicant. Board member Paul Struncius arrived at 7:46 and was brought up to speed on the application. Mr. Shea briefly went over prior information to refresh everyone. Mr. Yezzi, architect explained the changes the applicant is requesting. One of the requests includes seasonal pool enclosures, to be used on the days it rains to allow the visitors to swim. Mr. Wolfersberger inquired if the pools are included in building coverage. Mr. Yezzi replied he was led to believe he did not need to include it since the enclosures are seasonal. Mr. Galvin: Some things can be building coverage and still be impervious coverage. Mr. Moberg: Do you have the exact dates the enclosures will come down? Mr. Chiaia thought sometime in October. Mr. Savacool explained that the board usually looks at pools as a catch basin, but once you put a cover over the pool it becomes something different. Mr. Shea: Prior resolution conditions have been met except for what we are here for today. There are no additional rooms being added. Mr. Yezzi: There will be no change to impervious coverage; it will improve quality of life, no detrimental impact. Mr. Cangelosi: Building coverage requirement is 30%, application says 35%, that particular item was up for confirmation. Mr. Yezzi: O’Donnell-Stanton Associates updated the survey on 6/17/2005 and the figures agree. Mr. Chiaia explained why this would be needed. Usually 40 of 100 days of the season it rains. If the pool is enclosed our guest would have something to do. The pool will not be heated. We do not necessarily need two pools. Mr. Struncius: I could see the middle pool since it is inside the property. Mr. Moberg: The middle pool can only be seen from the beach. Mr. Chiaia: I would be happy with that.
No audience Questions of Professional.
Mr. Shea: Mr. Chiaia’ daughter operates a boutique, wants to know if there could be a small enclosure of deck area so his daughter could access her storage without going outside. Mr. Struncius: We can condition that.
Audience Questions:
John O’Grady: The complexity of this meeting has changed. You seemed more concerned in June. He complained that the signage goes against the ordinance. Mr. Galvin explained that the Board acts as judge on Zoning referrals. If an issue is not brought before us by the Building Department, we cannot rule on it. Mr. O’Grady is not happy that Code Enforcement does not follow up on conditions of the resolution.
Mr. Shea: This is an expansion of a non-conforming use, upgrade to the site. Seasonal enclosure for benefit of occupants. We feel granting this will not affect Master Plan. Minimal visual impact, all other changes are internal. He apologized to the board that this had not been done in the correct way.
Deliberations:
Mr. Struncius: By eliminating one pool enclosure and just having the northerly pool will help the functionality of the resort. Building changes are deminimus. I do not have a problem. Wolfersberger: Building coverage is my concern; we keep going up and up. One point in time we have to say that people cannot keep expanding and expanding. If application continues as proposed I would be opposed. Cangelosi: personal side wants me to punish applicant for violating his civil obligations to the community. We have heard your rational. The professional side of me does not have a problem with improvements, modest increase, believe in supporting tourism. For that reason I would not have a problem. In favor. Mr. Simon: Not in favor, excessive building coverage. Mr. Galvin: In light of Mr. Simon’s position, it would be wise to wait until the seventh board member hears the tapes. Mr. Moberg: I am always disturbed when anyone goes against the ordinances. Unfortunately the White Sands without thought went ahead and did what they had to do. The White Sands is one of the finer draws of the community and taxpayer. Not increasing the use, increasing the quality. I am in favor Mr. Galvin: I advise that you carry the matter until the seventh member reviews the transcript. You do not have to take my advice Mr. Wolfersberger: I think it is important that the applicant gets an idea how we all feel. If one more board member is not in favor than there is no reason to wait. Mr. Galvin: I agree . Mrs. Tooker: I am leaning on being in favor. I am usually a lot coverage advocate, but improvements are small.
Motion by Mr. Wolfersberger, second by Mr. Struncius to carry application to September 15, 2005 without notice.
Vote: Wolfersberger, Simon, Moberg, Cangelosi, Struncius and Tooker……Yea
Application carried
Meeting Adjourned at 9:08 pm.
