TOWNSHIP OF WALL

ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEET

HELD IN THE MUNICIPAL MEETING ROOM

OCTOBER 17, 2001

The Regular Meeting of the Wall Township Board of Adjustment was called to order by Chairman Noorigian at 7:40 P.M. Members present were Chairman Noorigian, Vice Chairman Clayton, Thomas Grasso, Dominick Cinelli, Anthony Rembiszewski, second alternate Wilma Morrissey, Attorney Hirsch, Recording Secretary Betty Schinestuhl, Planning Coordinator Pam D’Andrea, Engineer Glenn Gerken, Cheryl Bergailo 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.

Chairman announced Plasti-Clad will be carried to December 5, 2001. He also announced if Mueller does not submit an amended application by November 7, 2001 the Board will dismiss it. Attorney Hirsch said the Board has already ruled on the interpretation. Plasti-Clad has been remiss in filing an amended application.

CARRIED APPLICATION

CASE #BA42-2000 – Date application complete: October 18, 2000. Application carried from March 7, 2001, June 6, 2001 and September 5, 2001.

APPLICANT: SEELY EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY COMPANY

PROPERTY: 1329 Highway 34, Block 913, Lot 37, OP-10 Zone

RELIEF REQUESTED: Site Plan with Bulk Variance

David Shaheen, Esq. appeared for the applicant.

Attorney Shaheen stated the use was approved. He said the Board requested a grading plan.

Mr. Lalka, previously sworn, said additional landscaping will be provided. The parking lot will be 6’ thick. 8 X 8 ties will surround the landscaping. The wetlands have been flagged. We have added landscaping. The wetlands have been verified. They are in the original location. The south property line has existing woods and that will remain. Mr. Lalka explained the new landscaping plan.

Mr. Gerken said the wetlands were previously delineated. There has not been any change. The landscaping has conformed with what we have requested.

Attorney Hirsch confirmed if the lots will be merged. Attorney Shaheen said they will be merged.

October 17, 2001 Page 2

Attorney Hirsch asked if the landscaping plan was in agreement with Mr. Gerken’s office. Mr. Gerken said everything is okay.

Mr. Grasso asked about the Planner’s review letter of October 8, 2001. Attorney Shaheen said the only issue was the merging of the lots. We have conformed with everything else.

Mr. Lalka said the street trees are existing on the south half. He said the cypress will grow tall and create a screen. On the north portion there are a lot of junipers. They will grow to 5’. There will be full screening on the south half and on the upper half. Trees will be planted in addition to what is already there.

Mr. Grasso asked about Item 3 on page 3 of Mr. Gerken’s letter. Mr. Lalka said there is screening on the south side. We are asking for visibility in the front.

Ms. Bergailo said when the report was done we did not have all the information. We have no objection to the submitted landscaping plan.

Mr. Grasso moved to approve the application subject to the merger of the two lots. Mr. Rembiszewski seconded the motion, which was approved by a roll call vote. (Messrs. Grasso, Rembiszewski, Clayton, Noorigian and Mrs. Morrissey voted yes.)

NEW APPLICATIONS

CASE #BA24-2001: Date application complete: August 22, 2001

APPLICANT: PAUL LAWRENCE

PROPERTY: 1111 Atlantic Avenue, Block 303, Lot 14.01, R-7.5 Zone

RELIEF REQUESTED: Use variance to change the existing non-conforming use to a residential/office use.

Attorney Hirsch reviewed the file and stated that the Board had jurisdiction to proceed.

Sworn by Reporter Kane: Paul Lawrence

Mr. Lawrence said he purchased the property in April 2001. He is proposing to convert the building into office space. The front would be office space. In the back he would store his lawn mower and gardening tools.

Entered into evidence:

A-1 Elevation

The existing building is located on Atlantic Avenue. It is one story. It was previously a one car garage. The front was added. The front section is where he would like to put his business. The existing garage door would be removed. There is plumbing and heating the building. It would

October 17, 2001 Page 3

have to be updated. He would put in a rest room. There is a rear patio area that would be used for picnics and business meetings in the nice weather. There is a sign-post that is now on the property line. He would like to move that post and comply with the 5’ set back. There is a small sign on the garage itself.

Mr. Grasso asked what was Mr. Lawrence’ business. Mr. Lawrence said he is an architect. He has been an architect for 13 years. He has worked in Monmouth County with architects since High School. All his clientele are in this area.

Mr. Grasso asked what the hours of operation are and how many clients per day. Mr. Lawrence said the traffic will be rather slow. He schedules 3 – 5 meetings per week. He does residential work. He conducts most of his business off-site.

Mr. Grasso asked if contractors would come to the office. Mr. Lawrence said yes. He does anticipate people stopping by. The traffic will be light.

Mr. Clayton asked if the signs would be lit. Mr. Lawrence said the ground sign will be lit with two small voltage lights to illuminate the signs. It would be on a timer. It would go off at 5:00 P.M. On occasion it may be a little after hours.

Mr. Clayton asked if there could be more landscaping along the side of the building to the west. Mr. Lawrence said he would be open to that. He said he would be more than happy to provide the plantings.

Mrs. Morrissey asked if any of the neighbors objected to his business. Mr. Lawrence said no one has expressed any concern to him.

Mrs. Morrissey asked if he planned to expand the business and bring in another architect. Mr. Lawrence said no. He said if he had to hire someone he would have to move somewhere else.

Mrs. Morrissey asked Mr. Gerken if the parking was sufficient. Mr. Gerken said three parking spaces are needed. Mr. Lawrence said he can fit five cars.

Attorney Hirsch said the Board can place a condition that the site be occupied by the owner.

Attorney Hirsch asked Mr. Gerken if a site plan would be needed. Mr. Gerken said no. It is a home occupation use.

Attorney Hirsch asked Mr. Lawrence if he would be willing to accept the condition that there be only one employee. Mr. Lawrence said that would be fine. Attorney Hirsch said the Board can limit the number of employees.

Chairman Noorigian asked Mr. Gerken if Mr. Lawrence has complied with his review letter of October 2, 2001. Mr. Gerken said he has. Mr. Gerken said he has no problem with the waiver of a site plan.

October 17, 2001 Page 4

Chairman Noorigian asked about the review letter of October 4, 2001. Ms. Bergailo said he has complied with everything in the letter. Ms. Bergailo asked about trash pick-up. Mr. Lawrence said he does not generate much trash. The trash would be located on the west side of the rear portion of the house. He said residential pick-up is enough.

Ms. Bergailo asked if there were any renderings of signs. Mr. Lawrence said just the one on the elevation.

Ms. Bergailo asked if the signs would be lit. Mr. Lawrence said it would be lit with low voltage lighting. Ms. Bergailo asked if there would be any lighting on the building. Mr. Lawrence said there would be one exterior light at the entranceway. Attorney Hirsch said the ground sign would be grandfathered.

Mr. Lawrence said he would like to move the post sign 5’ back. Mr. Grasso asked for the size of that sign. Mr. Lawrence said it is approximately 7 s.f. Mr. Grasso said he would like the area kept to a residential look.

Mrs. Morrissey asked if there would be buffering on both sides. Mr. Lawrence said if the Board requests that he would do it. Mr. Lawrence said he would like to see what his neighbors wanted. Mr. Clayton said he would like some landscaping plan done before he leaves here. There should be some low shrubs just to give it a little less impact. Mr. Clayton said he would like six bushes, 3 – 4’ high along the driveway to the west. He would also like some foundation plantings along the side of the building. Mr. Gerken asked if there was a fence along the property line. Mr. Lawrence said there is an open picket fence to the west. It is 3’ from the property line. There is also some natural vegetation. Mr. Gerken asked if there was a fence where the Board is asking for shrubs. Mr. Lawrence said no.

Chairman Noorigian asked about the size of the signs. Mr. Lawrence said 18” X 8’. Something low key. He just wants something that says architect. Mr. Grasso said now he is encroaching on the residential look. He said nothing larger than 2’ in length. Mr. Lawrence agreed.

Mr. Grasso moved to approve the application subject to signage as discussed, no additional lighting on the building with the exception of one, landscape plan being submitted to Mr. Gerken’s office, that the property be owner occupied and the maximum of one employee. Mrs. Morrissey seconded the motion, which was approved by a roll call vote. (Messrs. Grasso, Clayton, Rembiszewski, Cinelli, Noorigian and Mrs. Morrissey voted yes.)

CASE #BA25-2001: Date application complete: August 28, 2001

APPLICANT: LAWRENCE & STACEY BREWER

PROPERTY: 1493 Jusmar Drive, Block 263, Lot 11.07, R-30 Zone

RELIEF REQUESTED: Bulk variance

Sworn by Reporter Kane: Lawrence Brewer

Stacey Brewer

October 17, 2001 Page 5

Mr. Brewer said he is proposing to erect a 6’ fence along his property. The property has two front yards. He is proposing a 6’ fence along the back and 4’ to the front. He would like the fence for security and privacy.

Entered into evidence:

A-1 Survey of Property

Mr. Brewer said the house is set toward the front of the property. Coast Buick is across the street. He is proposing to put a gate in the rear with a lock. In the front will be a double gate to the east side. There will also be a gate on the west side.

Attorney Hirsch asked what was located on either side. Mr. Brewer said lot 11.05 has a house which faces the same way his does. Lot 11.06 is vacant. The front of that house will face Sea Girt Avenue. Lot 11.08 has a house which faces the same way the Brewer’s does. It also has two front yards. Mr. Brewer said along the east side of the property there is a significant amount of shrubs and growth. The fence will be on the inside of the growth.

Mr. Grasso said that shrubbery and growth will probably be removed when a house is erected on lot 11.06.

Mr. Gerken said the Brewer home is the third lot in.

Mr. Grasso said he is concerned about the fence along Sea Girt Avenue. He asked why would Mr. Brewer put a gate on Sea Girt Avenue. Mr. Brewer said it would be for gardening purposes. He would have to mow the lawn along Sea Girt Avenue.

Mr. Grasso asked Mr. Gerken if there were any issues with the fence coming out to Sea Girt Avenue regarding the intersection. Mr. Gerken said no, the property is approximately 250’ from the intersection. The fence would be 15’ from the property line and the curb.

Mr. Grasso asked if there was a reason why the fence had to go on the property line. Mrs. Brewer said it is a nice fence. She said she did not want to do any landscaping until the builder was finished.

Mr. Grasso said approving this fence would have a domino effect. Everyone will want a 6’ fence because you have one. He said he does not believe it is esthetically best for Wall Township.

Mrs. Brewer said she did not mind plantings. She asked how much planting would the Board require. She said there would also be maintenance on the plantings.

Mr. Clayton suggested moving the fence back an additional 10’. He suggested planting pines or evergreens. Mr. Gerken said an additional 10’ would be sufficient.

Mr. Grasso asked if there were any walkways. Mr. Gerken said there were sidewalks. Mr. Brewer said the sidewalks are just inside the curb line. The sidewalks are 4’ wide.

October 17, 2001 Page 6

Mr. Grasso said the fence should be 25’ from the easement area.

Mr. Gerken said the property line is 15’ back from the curb. The sidewalk is 4’ wide. Mr. Gerken suggested white pines. He said you don’t want the plantings hanging over the sidewalk area. Mr. Brewer suggested aver vides.

Attorney Hirsch said lot 11.06 will front on Sea Girt Avenue. He asked if any others would be in the same situation. Mr. Gerken said lot 11.09 has frontage on three streets. Mr. Brewer said lot 11.09, 11.08 and his would front on Jusmar Drive.

Mr. Cinelli asked what jurisdiction does the Board have to put the same stipulation on the other lots. Mr. Gerken said the only reason Mr. Brewer is here is because he wants a 6’ fence. If he wanted a 4’ fence he would not need a variance. Mr. Gerken said he agreed that something should be set up so all the fences would be uniform. You want to have something that will soften it not hang over the sidewalk area. If they want to go right on the property line then they need a 4’ fence.

Mr. Grasso told about a similar problem in Apple Ridge. Mr. Grasso said the Brewers have to move the fence back an additional 15’. Being this is on Sea Girt Avenue we are going to need more in the way of plantings. Lot 11.06 will face Sea Girt Avenue. Mr. Grasso asked, if that was your property you wouldn’t want a 6’ fence right next to you. He said he thinks it should be set back 20’ from the walkway. He said it will soften the look. Mr. Gerken agreed.

Attorney Hirsch asked if it would be 12.5’ from the property line. Mr. Gerken said yes.

Mr. Cinelli asked what type of fence is being proposed. Mr. Brewer said a 6’ spruce stockade.

Mr. Grasso asked what would be planted. Mr. Brewer said a simple aver vide, some small shrub like bushes. Mr. Clayton said the Board wants to hide the fence.

Mr. Gerken said there is 15’ to plant. If the applicant wants to plant something else he has a lot of room.

Mr. Brewer asked what kind of buffer is the Board talking about. Mr. Gerken said a coverage of 50% - 75%.

Mr. Clayton moved to approve the application subject to submittal of a landscaping plan and the fence being 15’ from the property line. Mrs. Morrissey seconded the motion, which was approved by a roll call vote. (Messrs. Clayton, Grasso, Cinelli, Noorigian and Mrs. Morrissey voted yes, Mr. Rembiszewski voted no.)

RESOLUTIONS TO BE MEMORIALIZED:

ANISH PATEL – BA#21A-2001

Block 3, Lot 18

October 17, 2001 Page 7

Attorney Hirsch read the resolution. Mr. Grasso made corrections. The resolution should state “no vending, ice machines to be outside.”

GRASSO/CLAYTON

DEBORAH KATZ – BA#21-2001

Block 805, Lot 42 REMBISZEWSKI/CLAYTON

Chairman Noorigian and Mrs. Morrissey left the meeting.

Attorney Hirsch stated the Sunnyside resolution will be done at the next meeting. It will be posted on the bulletin board.

There being no further business to come before the Board, a motion was made, seconded, and unanimously approved to adjourn the meeting at 9:22 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

Betty Schinestuhl

Acting Recording Secretary