Borough of Little Silver
480 Prospect Avenue, Little Silver, NJ 07739
732-842-2400 phone 732-219-0581 fax

Council Administration Planning-Zoning Committees Police Fire Dept - EMS Recreation Library Court
Home
Mayor's Message
Borough Directory
Borough Calendar
Pay Taxes Online
Recycling - Garbage Info
Borough Newsletter
Public Records
Bid Notices - RFPs
Forms
Recreation
Business & Professional Association
Schools
Community

August 21, 2007

LITTLE SILVER PLANNING BOARD
BOROUGH OF LITTLE SILVER
480 PROSPECT AVENUE
LITTLE SILVER, NEW JERSEY  07739
(732) 842-2400


Tuesday, August 21, 2007                                7 P.M.
Regular Meeting - Planning Board

The Regular Meeting was called to order at 7 P.M. by Chairman Jacobi who gave the following Statement of Compliance:  Adequate notice of this meeting has been provided by giving of annual notice to the Asbury Park Press and Two River Times and by filing of such notice with the Clerk of the Borough of Little Silver and by prominently posting said notice on the Borough bulletin board.

Roll Call:    Present:        Mayor Castleman, Councilman DeNoia, Chairman Jacobi, Mr. Scott,
                Mr. Drawbaugh, Mr. Chimento, Mr. Nuara, Mr. Neff and Attorney
                Leckstein

Absent:    Mr. Olimpi and Mr. Lindsey


Approval of Minutes:  None at this time.

Correspondence:  Notice of DEP application filed on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Ribellino, 40 Paag Circle.  Copy of August 8, 2007 letter from Attorney Aikens to the Zoning Officer regarding the Rosenthal Application.  Preliminary approval from the County Planning Board regarding the Martelli Application.  August 14, 2007 Memorandum from the Zoning Officer regarding underground electric service.  Notice of DEP application filed on behalf of Dr. Richard DeBlasi, 640 Seven Bridges Road.  August 14, 2007 letter from Dr. Kutzin regarding his application.  August 16, 2007 letter from Attorney Gasiorowski regarding the Martelli Application.  August 20, 2007 letter from Gary James regarding 90 Lovett Avenue.

Unfinished Business:  None at this time

New Business:
 
Application of Robert and Kathleen Brown to construct a 12’8”  by 13’ second story bedroom and bathroom addition over the existing garage, enclose the existing 19’4” by 13’5” porch, add air conditioning condenser, re-side and replace windows and various interior renovations on  the  property  at 7 Rustic Terrace,  Block 25.01, Lot 1, in the R-3 Zone which violates the minimum required lot area of 20,000 square feet where 18,500 square feet is existing, the minimum required rear yard setback for a principal structure of 50 feet where 40.11  feet is existing, and the minimum required rear yard setback for an accessory structure of 15 feet where 2.2 feet is existing:

Attorney Leckstein noted for the record that his review of service found it acceptable and the Board to have jurisdiction.

Mr. Brown was sworn in.  He explained that he proposed a second story addition, placing a bedroom and bathroom over the garage and enclosing the existing screened porch.  He would also be re-siding the house, replacing windows and doing interior renovations.

When questioned by Chairman Jacobi, Mr. Brown confirmed that other than the addition of an air conditioning condenser, there would be no change to the footprint and also, no new variances would be created.

When questioned by Mr. Scott as to the interior configuration on the first floor, Mr. Brown explained that he would be relocating the existing computer area to the kitchen.

Chairman Jacobi called for questions or comments from the public.  There were none.

Councilman DeNoia Moved to approve the application as presented.  Seconded by Mr. Drawbaugh and the following Roll Call was taken:

Affirmative:    Mayor Castleman, Councilman DeNoia, Chairman Jacobi, Mr. Scott,                 Mr. Drawbaugh, Mr. Chimento, Mr. Nuara and Mr. Neff

Negative:    None

Abstentions:    None

Application of Stephen King to construct a 1076.42 square foot 2 ½ story addition consisting of a garage and family room on the first floor and a master bedroom and three additional bedrooms on the second floor with a family room in the basement and demolish the existing sheds and garage on  the  property  at 587 Branch Avenue,  Block 55, Lots 23 and 24 , in the R-3 Zone which violates the minimum required lot area of 20,000 square feet where 17,500 square feet is existing and the minimum required improved road frontage for a corner lot of 150 feet facing both streets where 100 feet and 175 feet is existing:

Attorney Leckstein noted for the record that his review of service found it acceptable and the Board to have jurisdiction.

Mr. King was sworn in.  He testified that he proposed a two story addition to the side and around the back of the home consisting of a garage, a family room, a master bedroom and three additional bedrooms.

When questioned by Chairman Jacobi, Mr. King advised that no new variances were required and in fact, he was removing to existing non-conformities.

Mr. Drawbaugh questioned whether there would be enough room, after the garage was built, to back out?  Mr. King responded yes, he has 44 feet to the curb line.  Mr. Drawbaugh questioned whether he would actually be able to turn around and suggested that enough room be created for a K-turn. 
Mr. King stated that he could do a k-turn now.  Mr. Drawbaugh noted that the garage would be extended four feet beyond the front of the house.  Mr. King responded that he felt it wouldn’t affect his ability to maneuver and reviewed the plan as to the area in question.  Mr. Drawbaugh stated he felt that the applicant wouldn’t be able to make the K-turn and suggested that the front walk be reconfigured to provide a better radius.  Mr. King disagreed stating that he felt there would be enough room.  Mr. Drawbaugh stated that dimensions were needed to assure him that a K-turn would be possible.

Mr. Scott questioned whether a K-turn could be done now?  Mr. King responded yes.  When questioned further he stated that the plan was accurate, it is to scale.  Mr. Scott, after further reviewing the plan stated that he felt enough room was being provided. 

Discussion among Board Members followed with regard to this issue.  Mr. Chimento noted that he also felt there was enough room being provided.  Attorney Leckstein added that the 44 feet is to the curb line, not the property line.  Mr. Drawbaugh stated that this was not the crucial area, where the K-turn is executed is.  Further discussion determined that the other Board Members did not have a problem with the driveway area.

When questioned by Mr. Scott, Mr. King advised that when complete there would be a total of seven bedrooms.  He has three bedrooms now and proposes four.  He has three children and another one on the way.

Mr. Drawbaugh commented that the deck in the rear will be shielded from the neighbors’ view to the north and that there would be no invasion of their privacy.

Mr. Neff questioned whether a second story deck was proposed?  Mr. King responded yes. 
Mr. Drawbaugh added that the second story deck faces Burdge’s Garage and therefore would not be an invasion of privacy.

Chairman Jacobi called for questions or comments from the public.  There were none.

Councilman DeNoia Moved to approve the application as presented.  Seconded by Mayor Castleman and the following Roll Call was taken:

Affirmative:    Mayor Castleman, Councilman DeNoia, Chairman Jacobi, Mr. Scott,                 Mr. Drawbaugh, Mr. Chimento, Mr. Nuara and Mr. Neff

Negative:    None

Abstentions:    None

Application of Geoffrey Owen and Amy Lauren Lloyd to construct a 30’ by 16’ one and one half story addition consisting of a family room, bathroom and laundry room on the first floor and office and bath on the second floor and a 10.5’ by 30’ L-shaped deck on  the  property  at 363 Prospect Avenue, Block 21, Lot 26, in the R-2 Zone which violates the minimum required lot area of 25,000 square feet where 20,000 square feet is existing and the minimum required front yard setback of 50 feet where 40 feet is existing:

Attorney Leckstein noted for the record that his review of service found it acceptable and the Board to have jurisdiction.

Mr. Lloyd was sworn in and advised that he proposed a one and a half story addition to his home.

Andrew Herchakowsky, 95 White Street, Shrewsbury, the applicant’s contractor, was sworn in.  He explained that an addition consisting of a greatroom, kitchen renovation, laundry area and bathroom on the first floor and in the second floor attic area, the creation of a loft overlooking the greatroom, an office and a bathroom.  A 10.5’ wrap around deck is also proposed and will be the same as the existing deck but moved out to the other side of the new addition.  Both variances are pre-existing.

When questioned by the Board, Mr. Herchakowsky testified that the deck would be level with the first floor, 2 to 2 ½ feet from grade, including the easterly edge where it slopes off.  Landscaping consisting of six plantings will be relocated/restored, beyond the deck.  Exterior materials will be consistent; the entire home will be re-sided.

Chairman Jacobi called for questions or comments from the public.  There were none.

Mayor Castleman Moved to approve the application as presented.  Seconded by Mr. Scott and the following Roll Call was taken:

Affirmative:    Mayor Castleman, Councilman DeNoia, Chairman Jacobi, Mr. Scott,                 Mr. Drawbaugh, Mr. Chimento, Mr. Nuara and Mr. Neff

Negative:    None

Abstentions:    None

Application of Barbara Luther to construct a 15.5’ x 16.5’ deck addition, 2.3’ above grade on  the  property  at 58 Maple Avenue, Block 55, Lot 9, in the R-3 Zone which violates the minimum required lot area of 20,000 square feet where 6,430 square feet are provided; the minimum required lot frontage of 100 feet where 50 feet are provided; the minimum required rear yard accessory set back of 15  feet where 9  feet are provided; the minimum required principal side yard  set back  of 15  feet where 7.6 feet & 10.3 feet are provided; the minimum required accessory side yard set back of 15  feet where 2.5 feet and 33.5 feet are provided and the maximum allowable lot coverage of 18% where 20.9% is proposed:

Attorney Leckstein noted for the record that his review of service found it acceptable and the Board to have jurisdiction.

Barbara Luther appeared with her Attorney, Tom Reardon.  Ms. Luther along with her contractor, Michael Fedor, were sworn in.

Attorney Reardon explained that the applicant purchased the home in 2006 and is remodeling.  The porch in the rear had been removed and she now proposes to construct an L-shaped deck in the rear.  He provided an aerial view of the proposed deck.

Chairman Jacobi questioned whether the aerial view was different from what was submitted to the Board.  Mr. Fedor responded, in terms of the footings only.  When questioned further, he explained that the deck was proposed 2.3 feet from grade, 28 inches, and will be 5 inches below the rear door.

Attorney Leckstein questioned whether landscaping was proposed?  Ms. Luther confirmed that landscaping and lattice were proposed.

Mr. Drawbaugh commented that the homes are closer together in that area and that the proposed deck was over 2 feet above grade.  He felt this would break down the privacy of the neighbors to the left and right, the deck as proposed is too high off the ground and should be as low as possible.

Ms. Luther responded that it would be the same height as before.  Mr. Drawbaugh stated that previously it was a landing, not a deck.  He noted the size of the deck as 8 feet for the Bilco doors and 15’6” from the back door; it is a good size deck.  He suggested two steps down to lower the height.

Mr. Nuara commented that he would be concerned with two steps down, citing it as a hazard.

Further discussion followed with regard to the height of the deck with Mr. Nuara commenting that he felt that the deck would be best level with the first floor.  Mr. Chimento agreed stating that he didn’t even like the one step.

Ms. Luther noted that she discussed her plans with the neighbor to the northwest and they are okay with the plan.

Chairman Jacobi called for questions or comments from the public.  There were none.

Councilman DeNoia Moved to approve the application as presented.  Seconded by Mayor Castleman and the following Roll Call was taken:

Affirmative:    Mayor Castleman, Councilman DeNoia, Chairman Jacobi, Mr. Scott,                 Mr. Chimento, Mr. Nuara and Mr. Neff

Negative:    Mr. Drawbaugh

Abstentions:    None

Resolutions:

Attorney Leckstein noted that the following Resolutions were not available and would be prepared for the next meeting:

Denial of Bifurcated Coastal Wetlands and Variance Application of Jerome Rosenthal to allow already added fill on the  property  at 216 Seven Bridges Road, Block 44, Lot 39, in the R-1 Zone

Application of Dr. Theodore and Fabiola Kutzin to amend the Planning Board approval of November 9, 2006 to demolish a portion of the existing rear walkway and construct a 24’ by 20’ two story addition expanding the existing garage from two bays to four bays and enlarging the master bedroom above, a 4’ by 15’ one story open porch addition, interior renovations, expand the existing driveway by approximately 45 square feet and relocate the existing hot tub on  the  property  at 20 Sherwood Road, Block 13, Lot 117, in the R-2 Zone by already constructing a 14’8” by 8’ rear attic dormer, a 10’8” by 13’ second story dormer, a 12’ by 5 1/2’ dormer style roof over a bay window and changing several windows.

Miscellaneous:

Underground Utility Service - 52 Pine Drive:

The Secretary read the Zoning Officer’s Memorandum to the Board as follows:

MEMORANDUM:

To:        Planning Board

From:        Michael D. Biehl, Administrator/Clerk/Zoning Officer

Date:        August 14, 2007

Re:        Underground Electric Service


Dear Board:

Recently I have been approached by JCP&L and several homeowners about installing underground electric service to their homes.  JCP&L indicates that there are at least five residences in Little Silver requesting this service.  My problem is that JCP&L wants to install a new pole on each property and bring aerial service to the pole, then take it underground on the individual property requesting underground service.  This means a new utility pole for each new underground service.

Our Ordinance requires underground service for new development but to install a  new pole(s) each time, seems contrary to the regulation.  Will you please consider this scenario in your application deliberations and perhaps some Ordinance change for a long term solution.

Thank you.

Michael D. Biehl

Joseph Hemphill, contractor, appeared on behalf of the property owners, Philip and Julia Welch.  He explained that the Board had approved a demo and rebuild on this property and the applicants are trying to place their utilities underground.  The old service has been removed and in order to place the new service underground, JCP&L must erect another pole.

When questioned by Mr. Scott, Attorney Leckstein stated that this issue never came up during the application.

When questioned by Attorney Leckstein, Mr. Hemphill advised that the original service was overhead.  It was removed and a temporary overhead service is existing.  He was told by
Mr. Biehl that there is a road opening moratorium which would prevent taking the service under the road and therefore, a pole would be needed on the other side of the street.

Attorney Leckstein stated that such a practice, if allowed would create a proliferation of poles.  He pointed out that an application can be made for an exception to the moratorium but it would mean more than just patching the road when complete.  He stated that he didn’t feel the Board had jurisdiction to deal with this issue.

Discussion followed with it being determined to refer the matter to the Borough Engineer.

Mr. Scott recused himself from the next discussion and removed himself to the audience.

The letter received from Gary James regarding development at 90 Lovett Avenue was reviewed and noted to be informational as to the demolition of a large part of the structure due to pest damage, dry/wet rot and structural defects.

Mr. Scott, who resides next door, noted that he found it hard to believe the cited reasons weren’t found before purchase and stated that he found the property owner to be less than forthright.

Chairman Jacobi questioned whether he was doing anything that changed the plans?  Mr. Scott stated that he tore the house down where the application was for additions.  He understands however that it is the position of the Board that when this occurs, as long as the house is built according to the plans, this is acceptable to the Board.  However, he was concerned that the foundation is placed in the same place it was before.  Discussion followed with it being noted that this is a Building Department issue.  Attorney Leckstein suggested that the Board could write the applicant and request a foundation survey with a copy of the letter to the Construction Official.

The Board then considered Attorney Gasiorowski’s request for administrative approval to relocate the placement of water and sewer lines through the conservation easement on the Martelli subdivision.  It was noted that the relocation of the utilities would require the removal of trees.  Chairman Jacobi stated that he had a problem with granting such an approval administratively.  Mayor Castleman agreed stating that the applicant must renotice the neighbors and reappear before the Board.  After further brief discussion, Board Members agreed unanimously.  Councilman DeNoia noted that there was testimony that the applicant had the easement and that there would be no impact on the conservation easement.  Attorney Leckstein will correspond with Mr. Gasiorowski.

Chairman Jacobi noted that the Board had matters relating to potential litigation to discuss and requested a Motion to enter Executive Session. 

Dr. and Mrs. Kutzin who appeared regarding their correspondence were requested to step out and advised that when the Executive Session was complete, they would be requested to again join the meeting.

RESOLUTION EXECUTIVE SESSION:

BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Board of the Borough of Little Silver that the following portion of this meeting dealing with litigation matters shall not be open to the public; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that it is anticipated that the matters to be discussed and considered in private may be disclosed to the public when the reason in closed session discussion and action no longer exists; and

BE IT STILL FURTHER RESOLVED that private consideration is deemed required and is permitted because of the following noted exception set further in the Act:  Potential Litigation

Mr. Scott Moved to enter Executive Session for the purpose of discussing potential litigation matters at 7:59 P.M.  Seconded by Councilman DeNoia and the following Roll Call was taken:

Affirmative:    Mayor Castleman, Councilman DeNoia, Chairman Jacobi, Mr. Scott,                 Mr. Drawbaugh, Mr. Chimento, Mr. Nuara and Mr. Neff

Negative:    None

Abstentions:    None

The Board returned to Open Session on Motion of Councilman DeNoia at 7:55 P.M.  Seconded by Mayor Castleman and it was noted for the record that all Members remained present.

Attorney Leckstein advised Dr. and Mrs. Kutzin that the Board went into Executive Session to discuss their letter which requests that the front dormers be allowed to remain and letting the rear dormer remain to be determined by litigation.  He stated that the Board found the suggestion unacceptable but would considering allowing them to keep the front dormers if the rear dormer were removed, in order to avoid litigation.  If not, the Resolution will stand.  He noted that this is the position of the Board which would not be discussed.

When questioned, Chairman Jacobi stated that the Board would allow a statement.

When questioned by Dr. Kutzin, Attorney Leckstein stated that the matter would not be discussed or argued.  If the change were to be accepted they would have to notice that the matter would be reconsidered.  He stated that the Resolution would be presented at the next meeting, September 6th.  If a letter were provided that the rear dormer would be abandoned, the Board may consider the request of the front dormers remaining.

Dr. Kutzin stated that the Board is talking about the front dormers as if they didn’t previously exist; they were on the original plan.

There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 8 P.M. on Motion of Mr. Drawbaugh and Second of Mr. Nuara.

                        For Chairman K. Edward Jacobi

                        ___________________________________
                        Diane L. Ramsey, Secretary
Dated:  August 29, 2007
























         
Click on photos to view larger photos

Borough of Little Silver
480 Prospect Avenue, Little Silver, NJ 07739
732-842-2400 phone      732-219-0581 fax




Powered by Zumu Software
Websites at the speed of life.
www.zumu.com