www.briellenj.com
A Community by the River

Borough of Brielle, NJ


April 8, 2008

June 12 2008

April 8, 2008

The Regular meeting of the Brielle Planning Board was held on Tuesday, April 8, 2008 at 7:30 pm in the Brielle Borough Hall, 601 Union Lane. After a moment of silent prayer and a salute to the flag, roll call was taken:

Present - Mayor Thomas B. Nicol, Councilman Frank A. Garruzzo,
Thomas Condon, James Harman, Thomas Heavey, James
Langenberger, Charles Sarnasi, Tim Sigler, John Visceglia,
Terre Vitale

Absent - Susan S. Brady

Also present were Ken Fitzsimmons, Board Attorney, Alan Hilla, Jr. of Birdsall
Engineering and Sherri E. Hopkins, Assistant Recording Secretary. There were approximately 27 people in the audience.

Vice-Chairman Condon then called the meeting to order and declared a quorum. He announced that, in compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act, notice of this Body's meeting had been sent to the official newspapers of the Board fixing the time and place of all hearings.

The Minutes of the March 11, 2008 meeting were approved on a motion by
Councilman Garruzzo, seconded by Mr. Heavey, all aye, no nays.

CORRESPONDENCE:

A copy of a letter re: rezoning for Brielle Shores was received, letter from Board Attorney Fitzsimmons to C. Keith Henderson, Esq.

CAFRA applications were received: 1) 403 % Osprey Point Drive, to construct an in-ground pool; 2) 407 Osprey Point Drive, modifying dock structures.

Also received was a notice of a State Planning Conference on April 25, 2008 in Woodbridge, N.J.

OLD BUSINESS:

The Board considered the approval of a Resolution for Block 21.01, Lot 21, 613 Park Avenue, owned by Wendy Arnold (Applicant - Dennis Roberts), denial of Minor Subdivision application. As there were no recommendations or changes to the draft Resolution, the following was presented for approval:

"WHEREAS, Dennis T. Roberts (the "Applicant"), having a mailing address of 23 Lebanon Drive, Brielle, N.J. 08730, has applied to the Brielle Planning Board (the "Board") for minor subdivision approval and variances pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:550-4760; and

WHEREAS, proof of service as required by law upon appropriate property
owners and governmental bodies has been furnished and determined to be in proper order; and

WHEREAS, public hearings were held on January 8 and March 11, 2008 in the
Borough Hall, at which time testimony and exhibits were presented on behalf of the applicant and all interested parties having been heard; and

WHEREAS, the Board makes the following factual findings and findings of law:

1. This property is designated as Block 21.01, Lot 21 on the municipal tax map.
2. The property is located in the R-3 zone.
3. The property has frontage along Park Avenue of 100 feet and a depth of 154 +- feet. Applicant proposed to raze the existing dwelling on this conforming property and create two nonconforming lots. Each proposed lot wou1d have a width of 50 feet and a depth of 154 +- feet.
4. The following variances had been applied for:

ITEM REQUIRED PROVIDED

Minimum Lot Size 11,250 Sq. Ft 7,743 Sq. Ft
(Lot 21.01)

Minimum Lot Size 11,250 Sq. Ft 7,671 Sq. Ft
(Lot 21.02)

Minimum Lot Width 75 Feet 50 Feet
(Lot 21.01)

Minimum Lot Width 75 Feet 50 Feet
(Lot 21.02)

5. Birdsall Engineering, Inc. prepared a report to the Board dated November 19, 2007. The Board adopts the findings in that report and incorporates that
document in this Resolution by reference.

6. Sergeant Grant Kitchenman of the Brielle Police Department prepared a
report to the Board dated January 3,2008. The Board adopts the findings in
that report and incorporates that document in this Resolution by reference.

7. The following exhibits were marked into evidence:

A-1 photograph of subject property showing existing dwelling.
A-2 rendering showing two proposed new single-family residential
dwellings.
A-3 Architectural plans.
A-4 area tax map highlighting properties that do not meet the Minimum lot frontage and/or lot area requirements.
A-5 five page exhibit of ten photographs of the subject property and
Other properties in the neighborhood.

8. Andrew Thomas, P.P. presented expert testimony on behalf of the applicant. He testified that he visited the site and is familiar with the municipal zoning ordinance and master plan. Mr. Thomas stated that the neighborhood generally consists of one and one-half and two story single-family residential dwellings. He stated that the home on the subject property is a one-story ranch. The witness indicated that the lot area of the sUbject property is 38 % greater than the minimum lot area requirement in this zone, and that 48 of the 77 lots shown on Exhibit A-4 have a width or lot area less than required in this zone. The witness opined that the variance is justified under section c(2) of the statute because it fulfills three of the purposes of the Municipal Land Use Law. First, new houses provide a desirable visual environment contrasted to the existing dwelling in poor condition. Secondly, the development plan provides adequate air, light and open space to the proposed lots and surrounding properties. Thirdly, this is an infilliot and it will provide a density consistent with other homes in the neighborhood. As to the negative criteria, Mr. Thomas stated that there is: no detriment to surrounding properties; no detriment to the public good; and no detriment to the zone plan and zoning ordinance. He indicated that three other subdivisions have been granted in this general are permitting the establishment of 50 x 150 foot lots.

9. Comments and questions by several Board members were raised relating to Lot 20, which is situated immediately to the west of the subject property. This lot has a width of 100 feet and a depth of 157 feet ±. This property is shown as Photo #6, at page 3, of Exhibit A-5. The location of the home is also outlined on the Minor Subdivision map submitted as part of this application. Both the photograph and the Minor Subdivision map show that the house on Lot 20 is oriented towards the westerly sideline of that property, leaving a substantial amount of property between the westerly line of the subject property and Lot 20.

The applicant was questioned whether any efforts were made to acquire all or part of Lot 20 in order to make the two proposed lots or create three lots
closer in conformity to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. For
example, if 25 feet of Lot 20 was acquired and made part of the subject
development application, each proposed lot would have a width of 62.5 feet
instead of 50 feet. If three lots were created, each lot would be 66 feet wide.

The applicant responded that no efforts were made to determine whether he
could purchase any portion of Lot 20.

The Board suggested that the application be carried to give the applicant the
opportunity to determine if any part of Lot 20 could be acquired to increase
the size of the proposed lots. The applicant declined to follow this procedure
and requested that the Board act on the application immediately.

10. Janet Hendricks, a resident of 615 Leslie Avenue, appeared in opposition to this development application. The witness stated that the proposed
subdivision was not in keeping with the minimum requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance. She commented that if this and similar applications were granted,
undue pressure would be placed on the school population because the town
was not following its master plan and zone plan.

11. Based upon the testimony and exhibits presented, the Board finds and
determines that:

(a) Each proposed lot contains only 66.66% of the required lot width in this
zone.
(b) Each proposed lot contajns approximately 68.88% of the minimum lot
area required in this zone.
(c) The establishment of two undersized lots is a self-created hardship.
(d) The subject property can be used or redeveloped and comply with all
bulk requirements in this zone.
(e) Applicant failed to provide evidence that additional property could be
purchased for the purpose of increasing the size of the proposed two
lots, which would lessen the impact of the requested variances.
(f) Variance relief if not warranted under section c(2) of the statute
because inadequate evidence was presented to demonstrate that the
benefits of this land development plan to the public, if any, outweigh its
detriments. The proposed plan created two nonconforming lots in
place of one conforming lot, which is contrary to the Zone Plan and
Zoning Ordinance.
(g) The relief requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment to
the public good and will substantially impair the intent and purpose of
the Zoning Ordinance and Master Plan of the municipality.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Brielle Planning Board on this
8th day of April, 2008, that the decision of the Board at its meeting of March 11, 2008 be memorialized and that this application is denied."

A motion to approve the above Resolution was made by Mayor Nicol, seconded by Mr. Sigler and approved by the following roll call vote:

Ayes: Mayor Thomas B. Nicol, Thomas Condon, Charles Sarnasi, Tim Sigler,
John Visceglia

Noes: None

Ineligible to Vote: Councilman Frank A. Garruzzo, Thomas Heavey, Terre Vitale

Not Voting: James Harman, James Langenberger (excused themselves from this hearing).

The Board then turned to a Resolution for Block 71.02, lot 10, 705 Evergreen
Avenue, owned by Robert & Brenda Fuller, and Block 71.02, Lot 11, 703 Evergreen Avenue, owned by Marvin & Patricia Newman, approval of Minor Subdivision application to create three lots from two lots.

As all members, as well as the applicant, had received a draft copy of this
Resolution and there were no recommendations or changes, the following was presented for approval:

"WHEREAS, Patricia and Marvin Newman (the "applicants"), having a mailing
address of 705 Evergreen Avenue, Brielle, N.J. 08730, have applied to the Brielle Planning Board (the "Board") for Minor Subdivision approval and variances pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55-47 &60; and

WHEREAS, proof of service as required by law upon appropriate property
owners and governmental bodies has been furnished and determined to be in proper order; and

WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on March 11, 2008 I the Borough Hall, at which time testimony and exhibits were presented on behalf of the applicants and all interested parties having been heard; and

WHEREAS, the Board makes the following factual findings and findings of law:

1. This property is designated as Block 71.02, Lots 10 and 11 on the municipal tax map.

2. The property is located in the R-3 zone.

3. The properties are located on the northwest side of Evergreen Avenue
between New Jersey State Highway Route 35 and Union Lane. Applicants
propose to reconfigure lot lines between existing Lots 10 and 11, which will
create proposed Lots 10.01 and 11.01 and subdivide resulting proposed Lot
11.01 to create a new building lot (proposed Lot 11.02). Proposed Lots 10.01
and 11.01, in their reconfigured shape, will be conforming lots. Proposed Lot
11.02 will be a nonconforming lot.

4. The following variances have been applied for:

ITEM REQUIRED PROVIDED

Minimum lot frontage 40 Feet 27.03 Feet
(Lot 11.02)

Minimum lot width 100 Feet 27.03 Feet
(Lot 11.02)

Driveway size 30 Feet Max 27.03 Feet
(Lot 11.02)

Maximum allowable not to exceed fill in excess of
Quantity of fill 2% of lot area 2% of lot area

Location of 5 feet from 2 feet
Driveway paving any property line (Lot 11.02 - South Side)

5. Zoning Officer Alan P. Hilla, Jr, prepared a report to the applicants dated
April 11, 2007. The Board adopts the findings in that report and incorporates
that document in this Resolution by reference.

6. Birdsall Engineering, Inc. prepared a report to the Board dated August 16,
2007. The Board adopts the findings in that report and incorporates that
document in this Resolution by reference.

7. Mike Johnson, Deputy Chief of Brielle Fire Company No.1, Inc. prepared a
report to the Board dated January 3, 2007. The Board adopts the findings in
that report and incorporates that document in this Resolution by reference.

8. James Langenberger of Brielle Fire Company No.1, Inc. prepared a report to the Board dated April 25, 2007. The Board adopts the findings in that report and incorporates that document in this Resolution by reference.

9. Sergeant Grant Kitchenman of the Brielle Police Department prepared a
report to the Board dated April 24, 2007. The Board adopts the findings in
that report and incorporates that document in this Resolution by reference.

10. The following exhibits were marked into evidence at the hearing:

A-1 Aerial photograph, portion of tax map and photographs.
A-2 Aerial view and photographs
A-3 Marked up/colored subdivision map

11. Victor Furmanek, P.P., provided expert testimony on behalf of the applicants. He explained that he is familiar with the site and has reviewed the Zoning Ordinance and Master Plan of the community. The witness commented that although proposed Lot 11.02 abuts the State Highway 35 right-of-way, this is an unusual condition because the highway is elevated about 30 feet above the lot, and there is a significant slope between the highway and this property. No access is available between Lot 11.02 and the highway.

Mr. Furmanek stated a c(2) variance is necessary because proposed Lot
11.02 does not have the minimum lot width and frontage required by
ordinance. He opined that the creation of the three lots is: consistent with the
development in the neighborhood; established lots having a bulk area
substantially in excess of the minimum required area; provides for density
consistent with the R-3 zone; establishes appropriately sized lots; and
provides adequate light, air and open space to the three proposed lots and
neighboring properties. As to the negative criteria, the witness stated that:
the proposed subdivision is consistent with the Zone Plan and substantially
consistent with the Zoning Ordinance; the new plan provides for appropriate
management of stormwater; adequate screening and fencing will be supplied
as stipulated to by the applicants' attorney in his opening remarks; and there
is no negative impact on adjoining properties.

12. Jason L. Fichter, P. E., provided expert testimony on behalf of the applicants. The applicants agreed to increase the driveway width from 12 feet to 18 feet in order to comply with the request of the Fire Department. The 18 foot lane will be set back 5 feet from the dividing line between proposed Lots 11.01 and 11.02; however, it will be located within 2 feet of the southerly property line of proposed Lot 11.02, which abuts the New Jersey State Highway 35 right-of-way. Driveways are required to be located at least 5 feet from sidelines. While this will create a new variance, the Board finds that the 2 foot setback provides sufficient room from the macadam driveway/fire lane to the property line, and that the significant area of vacant land between Lot 11.02 and the improved portion of the highway mitigates the impact of this variance. The witness stated that a 6-inch water line will be provided between Evergreen Avenue and the house to be built on proposed Lot 11.02. A fire hydrant will be installed on this water line as requested by the Fire Company. The sanitary sewer line servicing proposed Lot 11.0-2 will be located in an easement on the northerly line of proposed Lot l' 1.01. The witness opined that the 10-foot sewer easement will be appropriate to service proposed Lot 11.02.

The impact of the installation of an 18-foot driveway/fire land and the grading surrounding the driveway was reviewed by the witness and the Board's Engineer. It was agreed that the grading plan would be submitted to the Board Engineer for review and approval.

Following discussions between the applicants and adjoining property owners,
the applicants agreed to establish a 15-foot buffer easement between dividing lines of proposed Lot 11.02 and adjacent Lots 6,7 and 12. The buffer area will be planted with white pines (evergreens) or some other species approved by the Board Engineer at 8-foot centers. Any trees that do not survive after planting will be replaced to maintain the buffer area. Further, a decorative 6 foot white PVC fence, Kroy model with the first 5-foot solid and the upper 1 foot picket style, or equal, will be constructed along the dividing lines of proposed Lot 11.02 and adjoining Lo 6, 7 and 12.

13. No objectors appeared in opposition to this development application.

14. Based upon the testimony, exhibits and voluntary stipulations of the
applicants, the Board finds and determines that:

a) The three proposed lots sUbstantially exceed the minimum lot area
requirements in this zone.
b) The lots are consistent with other developed lots in this neighborhood.
c) The three proposed lots provide density consistent with the provisions
of the Zoning Ordinance and Master Plan.
d) The development plan provides adequate light, air and open space to
the three proposed lots and adjoining properties.
e) The proposed development plan provides appropriate management of
stormwater.
f) There is no negative impact upon adjoining properties.
g) Variance relief from requirements relating to minimum lot width and
frontage are warranted based upon the unusual and unique conditions
pertaining to Lot 11.02. This lot is substantially larger than the minimum lot area required in the R-3 zone and it is located adjacent to the unimproved sloped right-of-way area between the southerly side of proposed Lot 11.02 and the improved portion of adjacent New Jersey State Highway 35.
h) Variance relief relating to the two-foot setback of the driveway from the
southerly line of Lot 11.02 to the highway right-of-way is warranted
based upon the significant area of vacant land between Lot 11.02 and
the improved portion of the highway.
i) The relief requested an be granted without substantial detriment to the
public good and will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of
the Zoning Ordinance and Master Plan of the municipality, subject to
the applicants' compliance with conditions set forth in this Resolution.

NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Brielle Planning Board on this 8th
Day of April, 2008, that the decision of the Board at its meeting of March 11, 2008 be memorialized, and that this application be approved subject to the following conditions:

1. Applicants shall apply for and receive approvals from all other municipal,
county, state and federal agencies having regulatory jurisdiction over this
development application.

2. Applicants shall pay all real property taxes through and including the
calendar quarter of the date of this Resolution.

3. Applicants shalt file all required performance bonds, maintenance guarantees and post all applicable engineering and inspection fees.

4. A 15-foot buffer easement shall be established, by Deed, between proposed Lot 11.02 and adjoining Lots 6, 7 and 12. The deeded buffer easement shall be planted with white pines (evergreens), or such other species approved by the Board Engineer, at 8-foot centers. If the planted trees do not survive, they must be replaced by new trees to maintain the natural buffer between the four properties. In lieu of posting a bond for this improvement, applicants shall be required to complete the improvement prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any structure to be constructed on proposed Lot 11.02.

A 10-foot sewer easement shall be es.tablished, by Deed, on proposed Lot
11.01 to provide sanitary sewer. service between Evergreen Avenue and
proposed Lot 11.02.

The deed establishing these easements shall be submitted to the Board
Attorney for review and approval. Thereafter, the deeds shall be recorded in
the Monmouth County Clerk's office. No construction permit or certificate of
occupancy shall be issued until the deeds are recorded.

5. A decorative 6-foot white PVC fence, Kroy model with the first 5-foot solid
and the upper one foot a picket style, or equal, shall be constructed along the dividing lines of proposed Lots 11.02, 6, 7 and 12. In lieu of posting a bond for this improvement, applicants shall be required to complete the
improvement prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any
structure to be constructed on proposed Lot 11.02.

6. The three improvements requested by Brielle Fire Company No.1, Inc. in its letter of April 25, 2007 shall be constructed or installed on proposed Lot
11.02.

7. The grading plan for proposed Lot 11.02 shall be submitted to the Board
Engineer for his review and approval.
8. Certified copies of this Resolution shall be forwarded to the applicants,
Borough Construction Official, Zoning Officer and all other parties in interest."

A motion to approve the above Resolution was made by Councilman Garruzzo, Seconded by Mr. Harman and approved by the following roll call vote:

Ayes: Mayor Thomas B. Nicol, Councilman Frank A. Garruzzo, Thomas Condon, James Harman, Thomas Heavey, James Langenberger, Tim Sigler, John Visceglia, Terre Vitale

Noes: None

Not Eligible to Vote: Charles Sarnasi (Alternate Member)

NEW BUSINESS:

The Board then turned to the application for a Minor Subdivision for Block 120, Lots 18.01 & 19.01, 1013 & 1015 Riverview Drive, owned by Thomas & Carol Stark, to allow the moving of the lot line to divide the driveway and straighten the lot line.

The fee of $1 ,000 was paid, taxes are paid to date and the property owners as well as the newspaper were properly notified.

Thomas and Carol Stark came forward and were sworn in. Mr. Stark spoke and stated he wanted to do away with the sha~ed curved driveway, straighten the property line and to pave his driveway. Mr. Fitzsimmons asked if he owned both properties and the answer was yes. As there were no further questions from the Board, the meeting was opened to the public for questions and there was no response so that portion was closed.

Mr. Hilla then came forward and commented on the drainage and grading, it was tough to tell form the plans what is existing and what is proposed. A grading plan would be used as a tool for good neighbors. Mr. Stark said the drainage has always been bad, even though there is a gutter in front of the house and Belgium Block between the driveways. The rain runoff always fell on his side (1015 Riverview Drive) and washed away his driveway. By moving the lot line the rainfall will mostly now fall down his driveway. Mr. Hilla suggested that, upon condition of approval, a grading plan would
satisfy his concern; he wouldn't want to see the water on the driveway washing out a neighbor's backyard.

Mr. Fitzsimmons stated that, from what he read in the Mr. Ratz's report that no variances were needed; Mr. Hilla noted only for the existing conditions. Mr. Fitzsimmons explained to Mr. Stark that a variance is needed and to do this subdivision by deed would be less expensive; to get the property subdivided he would have to do it by public record and this can be done by deed or filed map, the deed is less expensive.

As there were no further comments by the Board or audience, a motion for
approval was made by Mr. Langenberger, seconded by Mr. Sigler and approved by the following roll call vote:

Ayes: Mayor Thomas B. Nicol, Councilman Frank A. Garruzzo, Thomas Condon, James Harman, Thomas Heavey, James Langenberger, Tim Sigler, John Visceglia, Terre Vitale

Noes: None

Not Eligible to Vote: Charles Sarnasi (Alternate Member)

The Board then turned to the application for a variance for Block 75.01, Lot 8, 812 Ashley Avenue, owned by George and Ruth Harms, to allow the demolition of the existing home and construction of a new single-family dwelling. Variance required - all lots must have street frontage, no street frontage requested (use of access easement).

The fee of $300 was paid, taxes are paid to date, and the property owners as
well as the newspaper were properly notified. Mr. C. Keith Henderson, Esq. came forward to represent the Harms. He explained that this is an unusual application and an unusual variance. A map previously approved by a former Mayor and Council was shown and marked into evidence. A document dated August 19th , 1957 was shown, signed by the Mayor and Council, and made this a legally established lot on the river being accessed by a 16 foot easement; the Zoning Officer denied the building permit because it did not cover the street requirements. The application position, under Borough Ordinance 21-9.3 establishes this as a legal lot and can continue as a nonconforming use under provisions of this Ordinance. The deed is what perfected that subdivision which dated back to the 50's which predates Ordinance provisions under the Municipal Land Use Act. If the Board disagrees with this interpretation, Mr. Henderson was prepared to present testimony from an engineer indicating that the criteria is satisfied under Section 36 Statute for retaining relief. He also commented that the Fire Company's report states there is no difficulty for them here. Mr. Condon felt this was a "no-brainer" as the existing house is there now and did not see the need for testimony on this.

Mr. Langenberger said the only concern is the access curvature going into the access lane due to the Stavola property changes. Mr. Stavola has a "bump-out" which will hamper the turning of the fire vehicles. Mr. Henderson said Mr. Stavola has no objections to realigning the curb at the Harms expense. Mr. Langenberger noted that the easement is 16 feet wide and normally an 18-foot wide fire lane on a solid surface is needed for access, but the Fire Company can operate within the confines of 16 feet as
long as the curb line is realigned.

The hearing was then opened to the public and there was no response, so that portion was closed. Mr. Fitzsimons asked for clarification on the realignment of the curb line and if Mr. Hilla was okay with this. Mr. Henderson explained it would be lined up with the existing curb; Mr. Hilla asked if gravel would be used for the access lane and Mr. Henderson said it will be a stable base. The Board then went into discussion and all agreed on approval of this application. Mr. Heavey then made a motion to approve this variance application, this seconded by Councilman Garruzzo and approved by the following roll call vote:

Ayes: Mayor Thomas B. Nicol, Councilman Frank A. Garruzzo, Thomas Condon, James Harman, Thomas Heavey, James Langenberger, Tim Sigler, John Visceglia, Terre Vitale

Noes: None

Not Eligible to Vote: Charles Sarnasi (Alternate member)

The last item under New Business was an application for a Minor Subdivision for Block 22.01, Lot 1, 110 South Street, owned by Liam Boland, to allow the creation of two buildable lots. Variances required: Minimum Lot Area (Corner), 12,500 square feet required, 12,039.6 square feet proposed for Lot 1.01. Minimum Width (Corner), 100 feet required, 77.36 feet proposed. Minimum Front Setback, 30 feet required, 26.3 feet on Park Avenue &23.9 feet on South Street proposed. A portion of this property is on a County Road - County Planning Board approval is required.

Mr. Michael Rubino, Jr., Esq. came forward to represent Mr. Boland and asked that the Minor Subdivision plan be marked as Exhibit A-1. He felt that both the proposed lots will be sufficient for this area and noted that most of the major trees will remain on site. Mr. Boland would like to retain the original house which has some existing variances. Mr. Rubino then presented two more exhibits of photos & layouts which were marked as Exhibit A-2 and A-3. Mr. Boland was going to purchase 3 feet of additional land from his neighbors, the Walters on Agnes Avenue, but the building of a
pool prevented them from doing this; a letter to the Stratero family was also written and copies of these letters were marked into evidence as Exhibit A-4 and A-5.

Mr. Liam Boland then came forward and was sworn in; he was asked about his plans for the existing house at 110 South Street. Mr. Boland knew extensive work needed to be done, including the foundation, but the actual work needed to be done exceeded his budget and the house had to be put on "hold". He found a home compatible for the new proposed lot and told the Board he had inquired as to purchasing more land for this property. He spoke of the surrounding homes on Park Avenue that were given variances and went into details on these dwellings, as shown on Exhibit A-3. He was aware his home at 110 South Street must be brought up to fire codes and he plans to build a garage on this property; only two trees in the easement
will have to be removed and they are in bad shape. He was asked if the existing home were to be razed would he be able to make a new structure conform as to front and rear setbacks and he said yes.

The meeting was then opened to the public and there was no response, so that portion was closed.

Mr. Rubino then called Charles Gilligan to speak on Mr. O'Malley's Plan; he was sworn in. He has testified before this Board many times and was accepted as an expert witness. He commented on the letter from the Board Engineer in reference to the grading plan and how it could be done without affecting the adjacent neighbors; he looked at the site and how things were arranged. He would like to widen the access point to the new Lot to the north, a much easier grading plan instead of trying to create something off Old Bridge Road which would be a traffic problem and a difficult problem to grade if there is access off Old Bridge Road. This plan could be easier and without any detriment to the adjacent neighbors. He had read all the Engineer's reports and had no problems with the comments and did not feel there will be a problem in grading; also, the sidewalks will be extended along the front of the new lot on Old Bridge Road. A letter submitted was marked as Exhibit A-6.

The meeting was again opened to the public for questions to Mr. Gilligan and
David Eareckson, 301 Old Bridge Road, asked if stormwater was addressed and any increase in runoff water quality which is a concern to the Environmental Commission. Mr. Gilligan said this is something that the Engineer representing the town would point out on the grading plan. All single family homes in Brielle have to go through the process now and have a plan to show that the stormwater management is handled correctly. This is addressed at the time of the building permit application and all Mr. Gilligan was saying was that it can be done.

Mr. Eareckson then asked if Mr. Gilligan knew what the soil conditions/infiltration is like and Mr. Gilligan offered they would use a sandy type of material; there is not going to be a significant amount of water coming off the site and the grass will act as a cleanser as the slope is pretty deep. As there were no more questions, that portion of the hearing was closed.

Cheryl Bergailo, a Licensed Planner with the firm Taylor Design Group, then
came forward and was sworn in. She has appeared before this Board in the past and was accepted as an expert witness. She spoke on various sites in Brielle requiring variances and felt the Board can grant these existing variances for the existing house under the C-1 or hardship criteria. Demolition of the existing house would be a financial hardship, a waste of structure and the character of the setback has already been established. She went on to compare the proposed setbacks to similar ones which were noted on Exhibit A-3. The lot on the interior is conforming, the lot that requires a variance is on the corner and that lot is surrounded by a number of lots deficient in area and deficient in width. The color tax map, Exhibit A-3 was used to show all of the deficient lots and width on Park Avenue, Old Bridge Road and South Street and she felt one could see the prevailing character in this immediate area in deficiencies and in lot area.

The new subdivision off Old Bridge Road, now called Captain Bailey Court,
match the R-3 zoning standards with very large lots. The proposal does fit the immediate scheme at the corner of South Street and Park Avenue and the application relates to a specific piece of property in terms of the variance being granted without detriment to the public good; it would damage the pubic good because the prevailing scheme in the area is lots that are deficient in area and width. This lots is 145 feet in depth where 125 feet is required and the house is not accessed along its narrowest
frontage, it's access is from the rear where is that extra 20 feet of depth which offsets the narrow width on South Street. If there wasn't this extra depth and it wasn't a corner lot, there may have to be access from South Street and extra width would be needed to accommodate a driveway.

She went on to speak about the Master Plan on principal and policy; this is an
area where there already is existing infrastructure along with existing systems to serve this property. She also noted that the trees are in bad shape and this would be an ideal location for a physical house which would compliment the houses across the street. She went on to speak about the Exhibit A-2 photos in relationship to the views from the proposed lots; the Board has granted 50 foot lots in this area and the deviation here would be fairly minor. The proposed house will be very attractive and the farmhouse is
charming. She further discussed the width and depth of the various surrounding homes.

She was asked if a lot of the subdivisions were granted in the last five years on Park Avenue and Ms. Bergailo said three were granted in 2003 and the one on Park Avenue ended up being subdivided into three lots. She then pointed out various sites on the tax map where variances and subdivisions were required and again stated the proposal matches the density of the area and the building envelope here would be wider. Upon a question on the safety issue she said the house has been there for so long nothing is going to change with any safety issues.

A discussion arose on sidewalk extension and it was decided that this would hurt the Walters property next door which has steps which would have to be removed and would put a hardship on this lot.

At this time the meeting was opened to the public and Mr. David Eareckson of Old Bridge Road came forward and asked about the corner lot, he wanted to know if there is an access easement that runs across the back of it; the answer was yes and there will be a driveway in the easement, this will all be part of the subdivision so that no access will be necessary from South Street. Mr. Fitzsimmons asked if that will serve both lots and they will both share the access and the answer was yes. Mr. Eareckson asked is the driveway will take away some of the usable area of the corner lot and Ms.
Bergailo said there is a driveway there already in terms of usable area. Mr. Eareckson and Ms. Bargailo then had a discussion on the sizable lots and the Master Plan. Mr. Eareckson asked about the financial aspect and felt this would be a hardship that will cost the town. He asked how much in taxes this new house will generate - Ms. Bargailo did not know and Mr. Eareckson said the average taxes paid in Brielle is $10,000.

Mr. Rubino commented that he felt that, in light of the existing development in this area and the existing size of this lot, this was justified under the Master Plan and the Municipal Land Use Law; it was also wise to try and save this old house as it adds a little charming character to the neighborhood and property.

Mr. Eareckson said he has lived in town for 12 years and has watched numerous subdivisions approved for smaller lots; he has also watched taxes continue to go up because every house that is built cost the town more. It does bring in some revenue and it is ironic that the school board budget vote is right around the corner and the town is struggling just to educate the kids that are there. This continuation of smaller lots being created is taking away from our open space and he felt the town is hurting itself. There is a house on a lot that doesn't have to be knocked down to be saved. however,
you can knock it down and build a little bigger house on that lot which will create a very nice house on a very nice lot with a lot of open space around it. It worried Mr. Eareckson that the path the town is going down is to continue to put in houses on undersized lots and he felt it was a detriment.

Mr. Eareckson asked if his home was shown on the plan and it was not within the jurisdiction to be shown. He was asked if he has personally seen any runoff problems from the lots in question and he said it wasn't so bad before all the vegetation was taken down and he commented that the County cleaned up this area 3 or 4 years ago. He said that anytime he drives by Old Bridge Road or South Street there is flooding with rain, he couldn't say where it came from. A Board member asked him if his house is
conforming and the answer was yes and he has two children in the school system.

As there were no further comments or questions from the public that portion was closed and the Board went into discussion. Mr. Langenberger said he does not have a problem with the subdivision but would like to see the 10 foot access in the back extended, he did believe a full 18 feet was needed but would like to see it a little wider than 10 feet; if shrubs are put in on either side it will be even tighter. Mr. Rubino replied it would be an 18 foot wide easement but a 10 foot driveway. Mr. Hilla reminded the Board that there is a five foot setback adjacent to the property line. Mr. Fitzsimmons
asked for clarification of a five foot setback if approved and then another sixteen feet and Mr. Hilla said that is what they would require through the zoning process, a five footsetback and then 16 feet. Mr. Langenberger said they look for fire lanes of 18 feet and stressed his former views.

Mr. Sigler said he agreed with a lot of what Mr. Eareckson said except for the fact there is going to be plenty of room between the houses; he felt this was a good subdivision and we was in favor of it. Mrs. Vitale asked if there will be a new drainage system to the existing home as it needed so much work to bring it up to code and Mr. Boland said he had not thought that far ahead. Mr. Rubino said they are obligated to not have any more runoff on this site and they will take care of the infiltration system. The rest of the Board members were in favor of the subdivision.

Mr. Fitzsimmons asked the Board if they agreed with Mr. Gilligan's calculation
that the easement should be 18 feet wide to allow a five foot setback from the property line then a paved width of approximately 10 feet with a 3 foot planting area. The Board agreed with this and Councilman Garruzzo made a motion to approve this application, with the stipulations as discussed, this seconded by Mrs. Vitale and approved by the following roll call vote:

Ayes: Mayor Thomas B. Nicol, Councilman Frank A. Garruzzo, Thomas Condon, James Harman, Thomas Heavey, James Langenberger, Tim Sigler, John Visceglia, Terry Vitale

Noes: None

Not Eligible to Vote: Charles Sarnasi (Alternate member)

As there was no other business to come before the Board, a motion to adjourn was made by Mr. Sigler, seconded by Councilman Garruzzo and unanimously approved, all aye. The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 pm.


________________________________________
Sherri E. Hopkins, Assistant Recording Secretary

Approved:

 

RELATED LINKS