ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 3, 2003
The Regular
Meeting of the Wall Township Board of Adjustment was called to order by Chairman
Clayton at 7:45 P.M. Members present
were Chairman Clayton, Mary DeSarno, Dominick Cinelli, James Gray, Anthony
Rembiszewski, Wilma Morrissey, first alternate Bob Kerr, Attorney Hirsch,
Planning Coordinator Roberta Lang, Recording Secretary Betty Schinestuhl,
Engineer Gerken, Planner Bergailo and Reporter Arnone.
SALUTE TO THE FLAG
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.
Chairman Clayton
stated the King application has been withdrawn.
CASE #BA27-2003
– Date application
complete: July 8, 2003
APPLICANT: ERIC OLSEN
PROPERTY: 1614 Holly Boulevard, Block 853, Lot 26,
R-10 zone
RELIEF
REQUESTED: Bulk
Attorney Hirsch reviewed the file and stated the Board had jurisdiction
to proceed.
Entered into
evidence:
A-1 Photo of front of existing home
A-2 Photo of detached garage
A-3 Photo of front yard setback – Beech Street
A-4 Photo of front yard setback – Beech Street
A-5 Photo showing property line between
existing home and lot 29
A-6 Photo showing existing lot 21
A-7 Photo showing existing lot 21 from Holly
Boulevard
A-8 Photo of Block 852, Lot 29
A-9 Photo of Block 853, Lot 21
A-10 Photo of Block 854, Lot 21
A-11 Certified
letter sent to neighbor, Mr. & Mrs.
John Newbury, asking to purchase property dated June 12, 2003
A-12 Response
letter from Mr. & Mrs. John Newbury
dated June 21, 2003 stating they do not want to sell their property
A-13 Copy
of tax map showing non-conforming lots in the neighborhood
September 3, 2003 Page 2
Eric Olsen,
sworn, stated he is a resident of Wall Township. He is a Wall Township Policeman.
He is a volunteer for South Wall Fire Company. He has lived in Wall Township his whole life. He would like to stay in town and raise a
family. He purchased his home in June
2001. He is proposing to raze the
existing home and construct a four bedroom, two bathroom home. The subject property is 7,500 s.f. where
12,000 is required. It is
non-conforming. The maximum building
coverage will be 27.6% where 22% is permitted.
The front yard setback proposed on Holly Boulevard is 16’ where 15.44’
is existing and 30’ is required. The
front yard setback proposed on Beech Street is 17’ where 9.65’ is existing and
30’ is required.
Chairman Clayton
asked if the property was a corner lot.
Mr. Olsen said yes.
Attorney Hirsch
asked for the setbacks on Holly Boulevard.
Mr. Olsen said 16’ is proposed.
Chairman Clayton
said there are numerous other properties that are non-conforming in one way or
another in the neighborhood. Mr. Olsen
said that is correct.
Attorney Hirsch
asked Mr. Olsen what is on lot 21. Mr.
Olsen said a 2½ story house.
Attorney Hirsch
asked is that house setback the same as your home. Mr. Olsen said it is about 4’ behind my house.
Attorney Hirsch
said the proposed house will be more in conforming. Mr. Olsen said yes.
Attorney Hirsch
said lot 29 behind you fronts on Beech Street.
Mr. Olsen said yes. Attorney
Hirsch asked how far that home sets back on Beech Street in comparison to yours
is. Mr. Olsen said about 10’ in back of
where my house is.
Attorney Hirsch
said you are proposing 17’ front yard setback on Beech Street where 9.65’ is
existing. Mr. Olsen said yes. Attorney Hirsch said that would be pretty
much like the house on lot 29. Mr.
Olsen said yes.
Attorney Hirsch
asked if there were other houses surrounding your property that are two story
homes. Mr. Olsen said there is one
across the street, block 854, lot 21 and there are several others. There are several within Manasquan Park.
Chairman Clayton
asked what the height of the proposed house would be. Mr. Olsen said 31’.
Chairman Clayton
asked what the height of the neighbor’s house is. Mr. Olsen said about 31’ – 33’.
Attorney Hirsch
asked if Mr. Olsen was going to demolish the existing house and garage. Mr. Olsen said yes. Attorney Hirsch asked if the proposed house
would have an attached garage. Mr.
Olsen said yes.
Attorney Hirsch
asked about existing building coverage. Mr. Olsen said 21% is existing.
Attorney Hirsch
asked why Mr. Olsen was demolishing the house and not adding on. Mr. Olsen said he thought about that. He said the structure is in very bad shape.
September 3,
2003 Page 3
Mrs. Morrissey
stated the site triangle will have no obstruction. Mr. Olsen said that is correct.
Mrs. Morrissey
asked if the proposed house fits in with the character of the
neighborhood. Mr. Olsen said yes.
Mr. Cinelli
asked for the square footage of the proposed home. Mr. Olsen said 2,070 s.f.
Mr. Cinelli
asked if a basement is proposed. Mr.
Olsen said yes. Mr. Cinelli asked if a
two car garage was being proposed. Mr.
Olsen said yes. Mr. Gerken said the
2,070 s.f. includes the garage area.
Attorney Hirsch
asked for the amount of living space.
Mr. Olsen said 3,300 s.f.
Mr. Gerken said
he has no concerns. He said this
application is going to increase the set back area. It is more conforming.
Mr. Gerken stated a plot plan must be submitted to the Building Department
at permit time.
The application
was open to the public.
Larry Leming was
sworn. Mr. Leming lives to the rear of
the property. He said he is the one
most affected by this application. He
said he has no objection what-so-ever.
Mr. Olsen cannot buy additional land.
This is a hardship. The proposed
home will be conforming to my house. It
will help improve the neighborhood. The
existing home is approximately 75 years old.
He could not add on to that structure.
Mr. Leming said he has lived in his house for 12 years. He is a Township resident and employee. He lives at block 853, lot 29 on Beech
Street.
George Schaefer,
lot 32, was worn. Mr. Schaefer said he
lives next to Larry Leming. He lives in
an older home that he has renovated. He
said he is non-conforming. He is 20’
from Beech Street. His home sticks out
further than Mr. Leming’s. There are a
number of homes in the area that are that way.
This application will improve the neighborhood. The existing house is substandard. It was built on pilings. It has a Yankee basement. This will be a major improvement.
Mrs. DeSarno
said she visited the site and she agrees with taking down that old house.
Mrs. DeSarno
moved to approve the application. Mrs.
Morrissey seconded the motion which was unanimously approved by a roll call
vote. (Mesdames DeSarno and Morrissey,
Messrs. Kerr, Gray, Rembiszewski, Cinelli and Clayton voted yes.)
Case #22-2003 – Date application complete: June 16, 2003
APPLICANT: WEICHERT REALTORS
PROPERTY: 2165 Highway 35, Block 263, Lot 5, HB-80
zone
RELIEF REQUESTED: Interpretation
September 3,
2003 Page 4
Attorney Hirsch
reviewed the file and stated, for now, the Board had jurisdiction to proceed. Attorney Hirsch stated there is a jurisdictional
issue.
Mark Troncone,
Esq. appeared for the applicant.
Attorney
Troncone said this application is here because Mr. Hoffmann stated the application
is not a conditionally exempt site plan.
We are here to appeal that decision.
Attorney Hirsch
said the ordinance in Wall Township, under easement site plan, provides the
approval may be granted by the Land Use Office or referred to the approval
authority. Mr. Hoffmann referred it to
the Planning Board and they said site plan approval was required. The decision came from the Planning Board.
Attorney
Troncone said he feels they are still entitled to an interpretation. The only letter my client received was from
Mr. Hoffmann. There are only three
items we do not comply with. He said he
thinks the Board of Adjustment does have jurisdiction.
Attorney Hirsch,
referring to the letter from Mr. Hoffmann to John Ragsdale, states his office
referred the matter to the Planning Board.
The Planning Board determined that administrative review is not appropriate. Attorney Hirsch said he does not know how
the Planning Board considered it.
Attorney Hirsch
read from the Municipal Land Use Law, 40:55D-7. After reading this Attorney Hirsch said this would be under
Planning Board jurisdiction.
Attorney Troncone
said this is about the zoning ordinance.
Conditionally exempt site plan is part of the zoning ordinance.
Attorney Hirsch
said he does not agree. Attorney Hirsch
and Attorney Troncone discussed whether this application should be heard by the
Board of Adjustment.
Attorney
Troncone suggested that this application be carried. He also suggested that they discuss this with Attorney Rubino.
Attorney Hirsch
asked Attorney Troncone to explain to the Board the question of the changed
roof. Would that create more office
space in the building? Attorney
Troncone said this began about two years ago.
The applicant submitted an application to the Planning Board for a
second story. The Planning Board had
concerns. The applicant had a number of
informal hearings with the Planning Board.
We want to just do some work in the interior and change the pitch of the
roof. There will be no additional
office space. The second story will be
used for storage. The applicant went in
and asked for a building permit. He heard
back from Mr. Hoffmann stating the matter was referred to the Planning
Board. The Planning Board said the
application requires a standard site plan application. We received no notice from the Planning
Board. We just want to improve that
building. We would keep the square
footage we have. The renovations will
not further violate the ordinance. We
have sufficient parking. The sizes of
the parking spaces are adequate. We can
comply with landscaping requirements.
September 3,
2003 Page 5
Attorney Hirsch
asked Ms. Bergailo what is required for a conditionally exempt site plan. What are they required to submit? Ms. Bergailo said the requirements were
outlined in Mr. Hoffmann’s letter.
Landscaping must be provided.
There is a list of criteria, adequate parking, landscaping, etc. Ms. Bergailo read the criteria for
conditionally exempt site plan.
Attorney
Troncone said Mr. Hoffmann’s letter does not tell us what we are lacking. He said we just don’t comply.
Attorney
Troncone suggested a meeting with himself, Attorney Hirsch and Attorney
Rubino.
Attorney Hirsch
said the Board needs to know what action the Planning Board took and how they
took it before this can be resolved.
Attorney
Troncone said the applicant wants to improve this building.
Jack Waters was
sworn. Mr. Waters said they have
struggled with this building. We went
before the Planning Board and we were told that they did not want us to go
through with our plans. Mr. Waters said
he feels he cannot get a fair shake with the Planning Board. Mr. Waters stated Brielle Furniture calls
the Police as soon as there is one car more in the parking lot. He asked if they can replace the windows in
the building without going to the Planning Board. Attorney Hirsch said the Board cannot give you that answer. We are an appeal Board. You have to ask Mr. Hoffmann. I have concerns if this Board takes action
someone could say we had no authority to take that action. We have to find out if this Board has
jurisdiction.
Attorney
Troncone suggested carrying the application for one month. Chairman Clayton said the application will
be carried to October 15, 2003.
Attorney Hirsch said no further noticing is required.
9:00 P.M. the
Board recessed.
9:12 P.M. the
meeting resumed.
Mrs. DeSarno and
Mr. Cinelli stepped down on the Heagle application.
NEW APPLICATION
CASE #BA25-2003 – Date application complete: July 2, 2003
APPLICANT: TERRANCE HEAGLE
PROPERTY: 1713 Winston Drive, Block 142, Lot 6,
R-7.5 zone
RELIEF REQUESTED: Bulk variance
Attorney Hirsch
reviewed the file and stated the Board had jurisdiction to proceed.
Timothy B.
Middleton, Esq. appeared for the applicant.
September 3,
2003 Page 6
Attorney
Middleton said the site is a vacant lot.
It is located on Winston Drive.
It is block 142, lot 6. It is
located in the R-7.5 zone. This lot
contains 5,370 s.f. where 7,500 s.f. is required. The lot is undersized.
The lot has a width of 60.56’ where 65’ is required. This will have no negative impact.
Attorney
Middleton stated Mr. McDonough will testify that the Sullivan family owned lot
13. Mr. Sullivan has owned lot 6 since
1952. In 1998 he transferred his
ownership to his son. There was no
merger.
Attorney
Middleton said Mr. Heagle is the contract purchaser. He would like to build a 2,500 s.f., two story home. There are some one story and two story homes
in the neighborhood. This home will fit
in the neighborhood.
Attorney
Middleton said Mr. Lipinski will talk about the negative and positive criteria.
Attorney
Middleton said Mrs. Sullivan owned lot 13.
She has no desire to purchase lot 6.
If this application is approved I will contact the next door neighbor
and offer them the property for what Mr. Heagle is paying for it, $92,000.
John McDonough
was sworn. Mr. McDonough gave his
credentials which were accepted by the Board.
Attorney
Middleton asked Mr. McDonough if he reviewed the title for lot 6. Mr. McDonough said yes.
Attorney
Middleton asked, since 1950 were the owners of lot 6 the owners of lot 5 and
13. Mr. McDonough said he did a search
on lot 6. The lot was purchased by John
Sullivan from the township on April 1, 1952.
The next change in title was May 11, 1998 from John & Anna Sullivan
to Robert Sullivan. Lot 13 was owned by
J.L. Sullivan and Anna B. Sullivan since July 16, 1948. On May 11, 1998 J.L. Sullivan and Anna
Sullivan conveyed the property to Anna Sullivan. John did not own any adjoining properties. Attorney Middleton said since 1952 he did
not own any adjoining lots. Mr. McDonough
said that is correct.
Attorney Hirsch
asked if lot 6 was vacant. Mr.
McDonough said yes.
Attorney Hirsch
said Anna Sullivan was never entitled to lot 6. Mr. McDonough said that is correct.
Entered into
evidence:
A-1 Title search
Mrs. Morrissey
asked if the shed will be removed.
Attorney Middleton said yes.
Terrance Heagle
was sworn. Mr. Heagle said he is the
applicant. He is the contract
purchaser. He is purchasing the lot for
$92,000.
September 3,
2003 Page 7
Attorney Middleton
said you are purchasing the property to build a house. Mr. Heagle said yes.
Attorney
Middleton said Mr. Heagle received approval to build his own home one year ago.
Entered into
evidence:
A-2 Photo of the house Mr. Heagle built for
himself
Attorney
Middleton asked if Mr. Heagle was going to build a house similar to the one in
A-2. Mr. Heagle said yes.
Mr. Heagle said
the house will be two stories. It will
have four bedrooms and a basement.
Attorney
Middleton asked if Mr. Heagle believed this house will be consistent with the
other homes in the area. Mr. Heagle
said yes.
Entered into
evidence:
A-3 Eight photos of homes on Winston Drive
Attorney
Middleton said the proposed survey shows the footprint of the home and driveway
location.
Entered into
evidence:
A-4 Survey prepared by Ray Carpenter dated May
1, 2003
Attorney
Middleton said the proposed driveway will be located at the northeast portion
of the property. Mr. Heagle said yes.
Attorney
Middleton asked about the shed. Mr. Heagle
said the shed will be removed.
Attorney
Middleton said Mr. Gerken suggested that an easement be granted for the
concrete pad on lot 13. Mr. Heagle
agreed to that.
Attorney
Middleton asked Mr. Heagle if he reviewed the letter from Mr. Gerken dated August
14, 2003. Mr. Heagle said he has
reviewed the letter. Attorney Middleton
said we have discussed the issues in Mr. Gerken’s review letter.
Chairman Clayton
asked about the two concrete pads on site.
He asked what the reasons for those pads are. Mr. Heagle said he doesn’t think there is anything sitting on
them. Mr. Gerken said he thinks the
best thing to do is to remove them off the property line. Attorney Hirsch said the applicant does not
own them. Attorney Middleton said we
will make efforts to remove them. He
said they would rather have them removed.
Chairman Clayton
said there appears to be a fence on lot 6.
Attorney Middleton said there is.
Attorney Middleton said we will request the owners of lot 5 to remove
the fence. Attorney
September 3,
2003 Page 8
Hirsch said the
fence does not have to be removed it just needs to be placed on one property
line or the other. The concrete pads
should be removed. If you cannot get an
agreement to remove the concrete pads then there must be an easement.
Attorney
Middleton said the applicant will comply with the remaining items in Mr.
Gerken’s letter.
Mrs. Morrissey
asked are you trying to keep as much buffer as possible. Mr. Heagle said he will keep as much as
possible. He said he has not put
together a landscape plan yet.
Mr. Kerr asked
if there is a concrete slab on the property in question is it going to be
removed. Mr. Heagle said if there is
one it will be removed.
Chairman Clayton
asked Mr. Heagle if he plans on living in the proposed house. Mr. Heagle said he plans on selling it.
Chairman Clayton
asked Mr. Heagle for the height of the proposed house. Mr. Heagle said about 30’.
Chairman Clayton
asked if there were other houses in the neighborhood the same height. Mr. Heagle said there are some with similar
height.
Chairman Clayton
asked abut setbacks. Mr. Heagle said
front yard setback will be 25.5’. Mr.
Gerken said according to the plans the setbacks will conform.
Chairman Clayton
asked if Mr. Heagle has tried to purchase additional land. Attorney Middleton said the other lots are
not conforming. We will offer this lot
to lot 5 for exactly what the contractor paid for it. We will produce a copy of that letter.
Chairman Clayton
asked for the square footage of lot 13.
Mr. Gerken said approximately 8,500 s.f.
Richard
Lipinski, Planner, was sworn. Mr.
Lipinski gave his credentials which were accepted by the Board.
Mr. Lipinski
said he has reviewed the application and visited the site. He is familiar with Wall Township’s Master
Plan.
Mr. Lipinski
said the lot is irregularly shaped. Lot
5 and lot 13 are developed. Lot 13 also
has a small bungalow. Lot 7, to the
rear, is also developed. Lot 6 is
wooded.
Mr. Lipinski
described the proposed home. He said it
will be a single family house. Two
variances are required, one for lot area and one for lot width. The frontage conforms.
Mr. Lipinski
said this has been an undersized lot for many decades. Additional property cannot be acquired from
lot 13 or lot 5. There is no other land
to be utilized for the construction of this home.
September 3,
2003 Page 9
Mr. Lipinski
said since the proposed house conforms to setbacks, lot coverage and height
there would be no negative impact.
Entered into
evidence:
A-5 Tax map
Mr. Lipinski
said there are ten lots of 50’ X 100’ with within two blocks of the subject
lot. The house types are mixed. There are one story, 1½ story, and two story
homes. The newer homes are all 2 – 2½
stories. There will be no detriment. It is in keeping with the neighborhood. There will be no negative impact to the
Master Plan. This will not have an
overall impact on the neighborhood.
Chairman Clayton
asked what the width of the driveway will be.
Mr. Gerken said only one car garage is proposed. It is 13’ wide.
Mrs. Morrissey
said the applicant is going to remove the shed and two concrete pads what are
they doing with the fence. Attorney
Hirsch said the fence will either be placed on the property line or removed.
The application
was open to the public.
Jim Maywalt, Block
142, Lot 9, Forest Street, was sworn.
Mr. Maywalt said when he received the letter in the mail and it was Mr.
Heagle that was going to build he knew right away that the right thing would be
done. He said he knows Mr. Heagle cares
about Wall Township. He said it would
be a marked improvement. He said the
lot is a hazard. It is overgrown. It would be a definite improvement to the
neighborhood. He said he thinks Mr.
Heagle will do a good job.
The application
was closed to the public.
Mrs. Morrissey
asked if there were any utilities going from the cottage to the property. Mr. Gerken said he is not aware of any.
Mr.
Kerr moved to approve the application subject to the removal of the concrete
pads and the shed and either the removal or relocation of the fence. Mr. Gray said also subject to lot 6 being
offered to the adjoining property owner for $92,000. Mrs. Morrissey seconded the motion, which was unanimously
approved by a roll call vote. (Mr.
Kerr, Mrs. Morrissey, Messrs. Gray, Rembiszewski and Clayton voted yes.)
Attorney
Hirsch asked for a copy of the contract showing the sale price. Attorney Middleton said agreed.
MINUTES TO BE ADOPTED:
Mr. Gray moved to approve the minutes of the Workshop and Regular
Meetings of July 16, 2003 and August 6, 2003.
Mr. Rembiszewski seconded the motion which was unanimously approved.
September 3,
2003 Page 10
RESOLUTIONS TO BE MEMORIALIZED:
THOMAS &
ANNE MOONAN – BA#14-2003
Block 795, Lot 6 Gray/Kerr
There being no
further business to come before the Board, a motion was made, seconded, and
unanimously approved to adjourn the meeting at 10:08 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Schinestuhl
Recording Secretary