ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEET
HELD IN THE MUNICIPAL MEETING ROOM
JANUARY 17, 2001
The Regular Meeting of the Wall Township Board of Adjustment was called to order by Vice Chairman Clayton at 7:30 P.M. Members present were Vice Chairman Michael Clayton presiding, Mary DeSarno, Dominick Cinelli, Anthony Rembiszewski, first alternate Mark Brosnan, second alternate Wilma Morrissey, Attorney Thomas Hirsch, Recording Secretary Betty Schinestuhl, Acting Planning Coordinator Pam DAndrea, Engineer Matt Zahorsky and Reporter Kane.
Attorney Hirsch announced that all requirements under the Open Public Meetings Act had been complied with for this meeting and read the purposes of the Board of Adjustment.
CASE #BA#34-2000: Date application complete: August 8, 2000
APPLICANT: EDWARD BLOCK
PROPERTY: 1612 Myrtle Avenue, Block 841, Lot 20, Zone R-10
RELIEF REQUESTED: Variance requested for front yard setback due to expansion of home. Bulk variance.
Attorney Hirsch reviewed the file and stated that the Board had jurisdiction to proceed.
Sworn by Reporter Kane: Edward Block
Mr. Block explained his side yard is also his front yard. He is 13 from the property line and 20 from the street. He would like to put a 12 X 22 addition on his home to make his bedrooms larger.
Attorney Hirsch asked Mr. Block what was on the side of his home. Mr. Block said there is a house. It faces Sycamore.
Attorney Hirsch asked how far from Sycamore is that house. Mr. Block said approximately 25.
January 17, 2001 Page 2
Attorney Hirsch asked, looking from the corner of your house, how would you line up with the house next door. Mr. Block said they were about even.
Attorney Hirsch asked, how many stories are you planning to add? Mr. Block said one.
Attorney Hirsch asked what is directly across the street. Mr. Block said a house and it faces Sycamore.
Attorney Hirsch stated your addition would be set back 12 from the property. Mr. Block said yes.
Attorney Hirsch asked if there was any existing buffer. Mr. Block said there are bushes. The addition would not be seen from the street there is a fence on Sycamore.
Mrs. Morrissey asked if the fence would stay. Mr. Block said yes.
Mr. Clayton asked what is the height of the addition. Mr. Block said he did not know. It would be the same height as the existing house.
Mr. Block showed the Board two pictures of other homes in the area that are closer to the street.
Entered into evidence:
A-1 Photo of house 20 from the street 1625 Myrtle Avenue
A-2 Photo of house 15 from the street 1622 Myrtle Avenue
Mr. Cinelli asked if the whole house will be sided. Mr. Block said yes.
Attorney Hirsch asked why arent you putting the house in the rear. Mr. Block said his property is 50 X 100. He does not want to take away from the yard. His family does a lot out there. If he goes to the back of the house one of the bedrooms would not be able to be made larger. He said he has very small bedrooms.
Mr. Clayton asked if there were any other comments from the Board. Are there any comments or questions from the public?
Sworn by Reporter Kane: Mr. Rath, 1607 Myrtle Avenue
January 17, 2001 Page 3
Mr. Rath asked how far would the addition be set back from Sycamore. Mr. Block said approximately 20 from the street. Mr. Rath said he has no objections.
Mr. Clayton asked if there were any more comments or questions from the public. There were none.
Mr. Cinelli moved to approve the application as applied for. Mrs. DeSarno seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved by a roll call vote. (Messrs. Cinelli, Rembiszewski, Brosnan, Clayton and Mrs. DeSarno and Mrs. Morrissey voted yes.)
Mr. Clayton said the resolution will be read at the February 7, 2001 meeting.
CASE #BA39-2000 Date application complete: September 20, 2000
APPLICANT: JOHN F. NEVUE
PROPERTY: 1708 Forest Street, Block 142, Lot 8, Zone R7.5
RELIEF REQUESTED: Variance requested for side yard setback. Bulk variance.
Attorney Hirsch reviewed the file and stated that the Board had jurisdiction to proceed.
Sworn by Reporter Kane: John F. Nevue
Mr. Nevue showed the Board photos of the side of his house.
Entered into evidence:
A-1 Concrete steps on side
A-2 Slab going to concrete steps
A-3 Deterioration of steps
A-4 Deterioration of steps
Mr. Nevue said he was seeking relieve for side yard setback. The steps are deteriorated and he would like to replace them and connect them to a deck in the back of the house. The steps would be made of wood.
Attorney Hirsch asked if the steps are 58 from the side property line. Mr. Nevue said yes. Mr. Nevue said the steps would be the same size they are now.
January 17, 2001 Page 4
Attorney Hirsch said the set back you are requesting is 58. Mr. Nevue said yes and the width of the steps will be 4 all the way back.
Attorney Hirsch asked Mr. Nevue to explain what is on the side of the house where he plans to build these new steps. Mr. Nevue said there is a chain link fence and some shrubs. Attorney Hirsch asked if this provides a visual buffer. Mr. Nevue said the steps would be exactly as they are now.
Mr. Clayton asked if there were any questions from the Board.
Mrs. Morrissey asked if the neighbors had any objections. Mr. Nevue said no.
Mr. Clayton asked if the proposed steps go straight to the deck. Mr. Nevue said the deck is in the back and the steps would go right to the deck.
Mr. Clayton asked if there would be any plantings between the fence and the house. Mr. Nevue said some flowers.
Mrs. DeSarno asked if the concrete patio will be removed. Mr. Nevue said yes and it will be replaced. Mrs. DeSarno asked about the height of the deck. Mr. Nevue said it is 35 from the ground.
There were no further questions from the Board.
Mr. Clayton asked if there were any statements or questions from the public. There were none.
Mr. Brosnan moved to approve the application as applied for. Mr. Rembiszewski seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved by a roll call vote. (Messrs. Brosnan, Rembiszewski, Cinelli, Clayton and Mrs. DeSarno and Mrs. Morrissey voted yes.)
Mr. Clayton said the resolution will be read at the next meeting.
CASE #BA40-2000 Date application complete: October 4, 2000
APPLICANT: CHARLES H. AND EILEEN C. DANGELO
PROPERTY: 2549 Jordan Way aka 2549 Ramshorn, Block 62.01, Lot 1, Zone R-30
January 17, 2001 Page 5
RELIEF REQUESTED: Variances requested to construct in ground swimming pool. Bulk variances.
Attorney Hirsch asked for a copy of the notice that was sent to the property owners. Attorney Kearns gave Attorney Hirsch a copy.
Attorney Hirsch reviewed the file and stated that the Board had jurisdiction to proceed.
P. Kearns, Esq. appeared for the applicant.
Sworn by Reporter Kane: Eileen Dangelo
Ms. Dangelo said her home was custom built. It is on Ramshorn Drive. Her front door and garage face Jordan Way. There are two front yards. The property is 12,000 s.f. The pool will be installed by Aqualand Pool.
Attorney Kearns asked about decking. Ms. Dangelo said there will be no decking, just stones.
Attorney Kearns noted he received a review letter from Bay Pointe Engineering dated January 9, 2001.
Attorney Kearns asked how close the pool will be to the house. Ms. Dangelo said 8. Ms. Dangelo stated her neighbors have no problem with the pool.
Attorney Kearns asked if shrubs would be planted. Ms. Dangelo said yes, mostly in the rear.
Mr. Clayton asked if the Board had any questions.
Mrs. Morrissey asked if a fence will be erected around the pool. Ms. Dangelo said yes a 4 6 scalloped fence. Mrs. Morrissey asked if there was a basement and also if the trees would stay. Ms. Dangelo said yes she has a basement and the trees will stay.
Mr. Cinelli asked about the fence. Ms. Dangelo said she would go along with whatever the Board requests. Mr. Cinelli said the fence would be limited to 4. Ms. Dangelo said that would be fine.
Attorney Hirsch asked to have the 3 walkway explained. Ms. Dangelo said it will be cement or pavers. Attorney Hirsch asked how wide. Ms. Dangelo said just 3 around the pool.
January 17, 2001 Page 6
Attorney Hirsch asked if that 3 would go to the property line. Mr. Zahorsky said the ordinance does not apply to walkways or ground coverage at ground level. A 3 walkway is permitted. It does not exceed the impervious coverage.
Attorney Hirsch asked about the pool being 8 from the house. That is one of the variances you are requesting. Pools are required to be 10 from the house. You cannot be any closer than 8 if the Board approves this. Attorney Kearns said whatever the Board requires will be done.
Mr. Clayton asked if the pool can be moved. Attorney Kearns said if the pool is moved it would move into the other setbacks. Attorney Hirsch asked if it can be moved a little without encroaching on the other set backs. Mr. Clayton said the Building Department may say you need to be 10 from the house, 8 may be too close because of the foundation. Attorney Kearns said if that is a concern of the Board his client would move it.
Mr. Zahorsky suggested shifting it northerly. It can be shifted 2. Ms. Dangelo said she would move it 2 so it will be 10 from the house.
Mr. Clayton asked if there were any comments or questions from the public. There were none.
Mr. Cinelli moved to approve the application lifting the 8 setback requirement for the pool and meet the 10 set back from the dwelling. Mrs. Morrissey seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved by a roll call vote. (Messrs. Cinelli, Rembiszewski, Brosnan, Clayton and Mrs. DeSarno and Mrs. Morrissey voted yes.)
RESOLUTIONS TO BE ADOPTED:
JAMES & SUSAN EISELE
KENNETH & TARA SHINN BA#37-2000
Block 901, Lot 19 Rembiszewski/DeSarno
WALLACE F. SMITH BA#38-2000
Block 708, Lot 10 DeSarno/Brosnan
Mrs. DeSarno suggested pool surfaces be clarified. Attorney Hirsch said that can be added to the annual report.
January 17, 2001 Page 7
There being no further business to come before the Board, a motion was made, seconded, and unanimously approved to adjourn the meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Schinestuhl
Recording Secretary