www.briellenj.com
A Community by the River

Borough of Brielle, NJ


August 11, 2009

October 29 2009

August 11, 2009

BRIELLE PLANNING BOARD

TUESDAY, AUGUST 11TH, 2009

The Regular meeting of the Brielle Planning Board was held on Tuesday, August 11th, 2009 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 Garruzzo, Thomas Condon, James Harman, Thomas Heavey, James Langenberger, Charles Sarnasi, Tim Sigler, Jim Stenson

Absent Terre Vitale

Michael Rubino, Board Attorney & Alan Hilla, Board Engineer were not present. Sherri E. Hopkins recorded the minutes. There was 1person in the audience.

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.

Correspondence:

Monmouth County Planning Board 2008 Annual Report.
Letter from Albert Ratz re: Lot coverage calculations.

Old Business:

The Board then turned to the Approval of Resolution for Variance for Block 32.01, Lot 23, 506 Woodland Avenue, owned by Christopher & Bridget Sawitsky to allow construction of a one-story rear addition to an existing single-family dwelling.

All Board members, as well as the applicants and their attorney, had received the draft Resolution. As there were no changes recommended, the following was presented for approval.











RESOLUTION OF THE BOROUGH OF BRIELLE PLANNING BOARD
FOR VARIANCE ON
BLOCK 32, LOT 33
FOR CHRISTOPHER & BRIDGET SAWITSKY

WHEREAS, the Planning Board of the Borough of Brielle, County of Monmouth, State of New Jersey has before it an application for variance relief for side yard where 10 feet are required and 7.4 feet are existing and proposed, and for lot coverage where 20% is allowed and 24.27% is proposed, and the Board has before it building plans prepared by the property owners dated January 24, 2009 which said plans were marked into evidence along with a survey prepared by Charles O'Malley, PLS dated November 19, 2008, and the Board having received a copy of the Zoning Denial dated February 20, 2009 signed by Albert P. Ratz, Alternate Zoning Officer of the Borough and applicant having appeared before the Board on July 14, 2009, and Patrick Accisano, Esq., having appeared for the applicant, and at that time the Board having listed to the testimony of the applicants and neighbors in support of the application and no objectors having appeared; and
WHEREAS, the Board has jurisdiction of the matter as a result of the applicable Ordinances of the Borough, adopted pursuant to the Municipal Land Use Law, Chapter 291, Law of 1975, as amended and supplemented, and the Board having considered the matter at a public hearing as set forth above, and the Board having made the following findings of fact:
1. The property lies at 506 Woodland Avenue in the Borough and is known as Block 32.01, Lot 23, and is in the R-3 Zone and contains 7,500 square feet where 11,250 square feet are required. There are other yard deficiencies which includes lot width, 50 feet existing, 75 feet required and the building violations of side yard principal building, 10 feet required, 7.4 feet existing; lot coverage 20% maximum 22.35% existing and 24.27% proposed. There are also existing violations with regard to accessory building which is called a barn on the plans. They are rear yard 5 feet required, 3.1 feet existing; side yard 5 feet required, 3.1 feet existing and there is an accessory shed which appears attached to the home, where 5 feet side yard are required and .5 feet exist. There is also an existing curb cut violation where 5 feet are required and 3 feet exist.

2. The Board finds that with regard to lot area and lot width, that they are existing conditions not exacerbated by this application. It should be noted however, the side yard of the principal building on the west side of the premises will be filled in as on the plans so that the house in effect will be squared off, so the 7.4 feet violation which exists will be exacerbated by this application. The area to be filled in will be approximately 12.2 feet by 11.8 feet.
3. This fill in area also causes the lot coverage to rise to 24.27 feet. The applicant testified that this area will be used as a mud room and will generally help the floor layout. The addition will be a single story addition and will be built in the rear section of the house. The Board finds that the only neighbors that would be affected by the addition showed up at the hearing and testified in favor of the application and the addition. They stated that in their opinion the house would look better with the addition then how it stands now.
4. The Board finds that the addition will have no negative impact on the area and will in fact be an improvement to the aesthetics to the house. The Board finds that based upon the testimony of the neighbor that there will be no detrimental impact as a result of the granting of the relief. The Board therefore finds that the applicant has met the test with regard to the C-2 Section of the Statute with regard to the application. In addition thereto, the Board finds that the house was built in the mid 70's, over 30 years ago. At that time, evidently it was a conforming structure. The Board finds that under the C-1 Section of the Statute, relief can be granted as the house is lawfully on the premises and it would be impossible to build any addition to the premises without violating the present standards of the Ordinance as the lot is undersized and as the proposed addition is reasonable and will have little impact on the area. The Board finds that the application is also justified under the C-2 Section of the Statute.
5. In addition thereto, there was a question as to a use of the shed on the side of the house on the premises, and a question is to whether or not the shed was included in lot coverage or not. It has been determined that subsequent to the approval of the application that the shed was included in lot coverage.
NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Board that it adopts the aforesaid finds of fact, and based upon the aforesaid finding the Board concludes that the applicant has satisfied the necessary criteria for granting the "C" Variances. The Board also finds and concludes that with respect to the "C" Variances:
(a) The Board finds that by reason on an extraordinary and exceptional situation that uniquely affected the subject property and the structure which exists lawfully thereon the strict application of the aforementioned regulations would result in peculiar and exceptional practical difficulties to, or exception and undue hardship upon the applicant. It should be noted that the Board finds that the building predates the bulk Ordinances of the Borough and that the building and structures at the site exist there lawfully;
(b) The applicant has demonstrated that the purposes of the Municipal Land Use Law and the Land Use Ordinances of the Borough of Brielle, would be advanced by a deviation from the zoning ordinance requirements at issue, and further that the benefits of any such deviation would substantially outweigh any detriment resulting from a grant of the application.
(c) The. Board finds that the relief can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and that the relief will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the Zone Plan and Zoning Ordinances of the Borough.
WHEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Board of the Borough of Brielle, does hereby dissolve to hereby grant variance relief to Christopher and Bridget Sawitsky for premises known as 506 Woodland Avenue, as specified herein. The maps can not be signed until conditions 4 through 6 are met:
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Subject to the development here at issue being undertaken in accordance with the testimony presented to the Board and the plans submitted to/approved by the Board.
2. Subject to the testimony of all witnesses called on behalf of the applicant being true and accurate.
3. Subject to the application, all attachments thereto, and all exhibits offered by the applicant being accurate depictions of that which they purport to represent.
4. The applicant shall furnish proof that taxes have been paid through the current
quarter and through the quarter in which he receives his initial construction permit.
5. Subject to the applicant paying in full all application fees, review fees, engineering and consulting fees, and escrows. Subject to the applicant posting deposits for the required engineering and inspection fees, in amounts fixed by the Board and/or borough Engineers.
6. Subject to the applicant obtaining and complying with the approval of any other reviewing agency having jurisdiction over the improvement of the property as proposed under this project, including but not limited to the Board of Health, the Borough Engineer,
the Borough Fire Official, and any County, State, or Federal agency; provided, however that in the event that any other agency or authority shall require any changes in the plans herein approved, then any such changes must be submitted to this Board for review and approval. Further, if another governmental agency grants a waiver or variance of a regulation, which same affects this approval or any condition attached hereto, or otherwise requires any changes in the plans herein approved, then this matter shall be brought back before the Board for review of any such action, and the Board shall have the right to modify this approval and/or the conditions attached hereto.
Further, this Board directs that the Land Use Office take whatever steps it may deem necessary to insure that restoration of this site to its original condition occurs if the developer is deemed by the Land Use Office to be in substantial non-compliance with the standards of performance and the conditions set forth in this Resolution of the Planning Board (and/or Borough Ordinances) and that steps also be taken as may be deemed necessary by the Borough to place the responsibility of same financially and otherwise upon the Applicant and the principal involved as well as his heirs, successors and assigns.

________________________________
KAREN S. BRISBEN, Board Secretary


Adopted: August 11, 2009 Moved by: James Langenberger Seconded by: Tim Sigler

Ayes: Mayor Thomas B. Nicol, Thomas Condon, James Langenberger, Charles Sarnasi, Tim Sigler, James Stenson

Noes: None

Not Eligible to Vote: Councilman Frank A. Garruzzo, James Harman, Thomas Heavey
Absent: Terre Vitale


I, Karen S. Brisben, Recording Secretary of the Borough of Brielle Planning Board, do hereby certify the foregoing to be a true coy of the Resolution that was adopted by the Planning Board on August 11, 2009.


____________________________
Karen S. Brisben

















The Board then turned to the Approval of Resolution for Variance for 99.03, Lot 19, 927 Cole Drive, owned by Denise & Gary Lembo.

All Board members, as well as the applicants and their attorney, had received the draft Resolution. As there were no changes recommended, the following was presented for approval.

RESOLUTION OF THE BOROUGH OF BRIELLE PLANNING BOARD
FOR VARIANCE ON
BLOCK 99.03 LOT 19
FOR DENISE & GARY LEMBO


WHEREAS, the Planning Board of the Borough of Brielle, County of Monmouth, State of New Jersey has before it an application on behalf of Denise and Gary Lembo for variance relief, front yard setback where 33 feet to Cole Drive are proposed and 40 feet are required, and the applicant having submitted architectural sketches prepared by the applicant as homeowner and a property survey prepared by David J. Von Steenburg, PLS dated June 30, 2004 having been submitted and the applicant having appeared before the Board on July 14, 2009 and the applicant having presented its case at that time, and no objectors appearing; and
WHEREAS, the Board has jurisdiction of the matter as a result of the applicable Ordinances of the Borough, adopted pursuant to the Municipal Land Use Law, Chapter 291, Law of 1975, as amended and supplemented, and the Board having considered the matter at a public hearing as set forth above, and the Board having made the following findings of fact:


1. The property in question lies in the R-2 Zone and is known as Block 99.03 Lot 19 on the Borough Tax Map. The premises is also known as 927 Cole Drive in the Borough. The premises is a corner lot and Cole Drive terminates at the applicants property line. There are a number of existing non-conformities at the premises which include: lot width - 125 feet required, 116 existing; rear setback - 40 feet required, 33 feet existing; side setback - corner Southwest Drive, 40 feet required, 39.61 feet existing; front setback - pool, 40 feet required, 12 feet existing. In addition thereto, the existing driveway curb cut has no setback where 3 feet is required by Code Section 21-31.11.
2. The Board finds that these all existing conditions not in any way exacerbated by this application. The applicant is requesting permission to allow construction of the front porch addition of 35 feet in length and 7 feet wide to the existing principal structure at the property. The front porch will face Cole Drive.
3. As noted above, the property fronts both Southwest Drive and Cole Drive. The Board is satisfied after reviewing the plans submitted and after listening to the testimony of the applicants that the addition to the porch will enhance the aesthetic look of the house. The Board is also satisfied that as there is an existing structure on the property, lawfully thereon, that it would be impossible to add a porch to the property without violating the front yard setback. The Board is also satisfied that because of the location of the house on the corner of Southwest Drive and Cole Drive that the porch will in no way have a negative impact to the neighbors to either side of the property or across the street from the property.
4. The Board is also satisfied that the porch will be a substantial improvement to the aesthetics of the premises and that any deviation from the ordinance requirement will be substantially outweighed by the benefits aesthetically to the area. The Board finds that the benefits substantially outweigh any detriments that the addition might cause. The Board further finds that the relief can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and that the deviation will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance or the Master Plan of the Borough of Brielle.
NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Board that it adopts the aforesaid finds of fact, and based upon the aforesaid finding the Board concludes that the applicant has satisfied the necessary criteria for granting the "C" Variances. The Board also finds and concludes that with respect to the “C”.
(a) The Board finds that by reason on an extraordinary and exceptional situation that uniquely affected the subject property and the structure which exists lawfully thereon the strict application of the aforementioned regulations would result in peculiar and exceptional practical difficulties to, or exception and undue hardship upon the applicant. It should be noted that the Board finds that the building predates the site plan Ordinances of the Borough and that the building and structures at the site exist there lawfully;
(b) The applicant has demonstrated that the purposes of the Municipal Land Use Law and the Land Use Ordinances of the Borough of Brielle, would be advanced by a deviation from the zoning ordinance requirements at issue, and further that the benefits of any such deviation would substantially outweigh any detriment resulting from a grant of the application.
(c) The Board finds that the relief can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and that the relief will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the Zone Plan and Zoning Ordinances of the Borough.
WHEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Board of the Borough of Brielle, does hereby dissolve to grant variance relief to Denise and Gary Lembo for premises known as 927 Cole Drive in the Borough for variance relief from Code Section 2112 for front yard setback along Cole Drive in the Borough for variance relief from Code Section 21-12 for front yard setback along Cole Drive where 40 feet are required and 33 feet are proposed.

GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Subject to the development here at issue being undertaken in accordance with the testimony presented to the Board and the plans submitted to/approved by the Board.
2. Subject to the testimony of all witnesses called on behalf of the applicant being true and accurate.
3. Subject to the application, all attachments thereto, and all exhibits offered by the applicant being accurate depictions of that which they purport to represent.
4. The applicant shall furnish proof that taxes have been paid through the current quarter and through the quarter in which he receives his initial construction permit.
5. Subject to the applicant paying in full all application fees, review fees, engineering and consulting fees, and escrows. Subject to the applicant posting deposits for the required engineering and inspection fees, in amounts fixed by the Board and/or Borough Engineers.
6. Subject to the applicant obtaining and complying with the approval of any other reviewing agency having jurisdiction over the improvement of the property as proposed under this project, including but not limited to the Board of Health, the Borough Engineer, the Borough Fire Official, and any County, State, or Federal agency; provided, however that in the event that any other agency or authority shall require any changes in the plans herein approved, then any such changes must be submitted to this Board for review and approval. Further, if another governmental agency grants a waiver or variance of a regulation, which same affects this approval or any condition attached hereto, or otherwise requires any changes in the plan herein approved, then this matter shall be brought back before the board for review of any such action, and the Board shall have the right to modify this approval and/or the conditions attached hereto.
Further, this Board directs that the Land Use Office take whatever steps it may deem necessary to insure that restoration of this site to its original condition occurs if the developer is deemed by the Land Use Office to be in substantial non-compliance with the standards of performance and the conditions set forth in this Resolution of the Planning Board (and/or Borough Ordinances) and that steps also be taken as may be deemed necessary by the Borough to place the responsibility of same financially and otherwise upon the applicant and the principal involved as well as his heirs, successors and assigns.
Adopted: August 11, 2009 Moved by: James Langenberger Seconded by: Tim Sigler
Ayes: Mayor Thomas B. Nicol, Thomas Condon, James Langenberger, Charles Sarnasi, Tim Sigler, James Stenson
Noes: None
Not Eligible to Vote: Councilman Frank A. Garruzzo, James Harman, Thomas Heavey
Absent: Terre Vitale

I, Karen S. Brisben, Recording Secretary of the Borough of Brielle Planning Board, do hereby certify the foregoing to be a true copy of the Resolution that was adopted by the Planning board on August 11th, 2009.

_____________________________
Karen S. Brisben

As there was no other business to come before the Board, a motion to adjourn was made by councilman Garruzzo, seconded by Mr. Harman and unanimously approved, all aye. The meeting was adjourned at 7:35 pm.

_______________________________
Sherri E. Hopkins, Recording Secretary

 

RELATED LINKS