A Community by the River

Borough of Brielle, NJ

March 13, 2012

July 17 2012

March 13, 2012



The Regular meeting of the Brielle Planning Board was held on Tuesday, March 13, 2012 at 7:30 pm in the BrieIle Borough Hall, 601 Union Lane.

After a moment of silent prayer and a salute to the flag, roll call was taken:
Present — Mayor Thomas Nicol, Councilman Frank Garruzzo, Thomas Condon, James Harman, James Langenberger, John O'Donnell, Charles Sarnasi, Tim Sigler, James Stenson, Terre Vitale, Alternate Members Gina Murdoch, Nichola p Stango, Spencer Thornton
Absent None

Also present were Michael Rubino, Board Attorney, Claire Odud from Birdsall Engineering Services, Karen S. Brisben, Recording Secretary and Carol McMenamy, Alternate Board Secretary. There were approximately 35 people in the audience

Let it be put in the record that, before the meeting started, Planning Board member James Harman was sworn in to a new term to 12/31/15.

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 February 14, 2012 meeting were approved on a motion by Councilman Garruzzo, seconded by Mrs. Vitale and approved unanimously by voice vote, all aye.


As there was no correspondence, the Board turned to the approval of a Resolution for Block 9.01, Lot 8, 306 Old Bridge Road, owned by Christopher & Gatian Height, to allow construction of a swimming pool in the rear yard — over two feet fill change in elevation.

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

"WHEREAS, the Planning Board of the Borough of Brielle, County of Monmouth, State of New Jersey has before it an application for variance relief and on behalf of Christopher & Gatian Height, for premises known as 306 Old Bridge Road, said premises also known as Block 9.01, Lot 8 and the applicants having appeared pro se before the Board and William F. Voeltz, PE, having drawn the plans regarding the matter and said plans being marked into evidence and the Board having listened to the testimony offered on behalf of the applicants and objectors, if any, on Tuesday, February 14, 2012; 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 premises'in question are located at 306 Old Bridge Road, Brielle, New Jersey. The applicants plan on constructing an in-ground swimming pool on the premises along,with structures apPiirtenarit tb it. The-propbrti Contains steep slopes that direct stormwater runoff towards the existing residential• foundation. In order to construct the aforesaid pool along with paver patio and detached shed,- it will be necessary to construct a retaining wall and to excavate fill at the site in excess of what is allowed. As a result thereof, the applicants need variances for relief for the retaining wall alongrvvith soil removal as aforesaid.
2. At the hearing, the applicant offered testimony which the Board accepts that the property is steeply sloped and that without the retaining wall and without the removal of the soil it would be impossible to install a pool at the premises as water would flow directly towards the existing house causing.destruction to it. The proposed retaining wall is 29" and the amount of fill to be removed is in excess of 1,000 c.f.
3. The Board finds that the house at the site has been existing for a number of years and sits at the low portion of the property. The elevations at the house are 20.5' and there is a high point of 26' in the back yard which is about where the pool is to be located. Therefore, the Board finds good reason to remove the fill and build the retaining wall. Draining will flow from the rear of the house towards the front of the house per the plans and representations of the engineer. The Board finds that the addition of the retaining wall and removal of the soil helps with the drainage, which will alleviate any drainage concerns with the neighbors both to the rear and the sides of the property. The re-grading will be done as part of the construction with the pool.

NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Board that it adopts the aforesaid findings of fact, and based upon the aforesaid findings 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 of 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.
(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 grant variance approval to Christopher and Gatian Height for Premise known as 306 Old Bridge Road, Brielle N.J. said premises also being known as Block 9.01, Lot 8, for variance approval to construct a pool in the back yard and as part of constructing the pool there will be removal of fill in excess of 2% of lot area and to construct a 29" retaining wall which is above 2 feet allowed bylhe Ordinance, subject 10 the following:

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, it another governmental agency grants a waiver or variance of a resolution; 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 tomodify this approval and/or the conditions attached hereto.


1. If, after construction, it is found that the drainage is not correct and does affect any of the neighbors of the property, the applicant agrees to submit new plans to the Board Engineer and have the property re-graded so as to alleviate any adverse impact of the neighboring property.

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."

The above Resolution was approved on a motion by Councilman Garruzzo, seconded by Mr. Sigler and by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Mayor Thomas Nicol, Councilman Frank Garruzzo, Thomas Condon, James Harman, James Langenberger, Tim Sigler, James Stenson, Terre Vitale
Noes: None
Not Eligible to Vote: John O'Donnell, Charles Sarnasi, James Stenson

The Board then turned to the continuation of a Use Variance for Block 73.01, Lots 8-8.01, 405 Riverview Lane, owned by the Manasquan River Yacht Club, to allow construction of a two-story Sailing Center.

Several members had to leave the dais at this time due to conflicts with this application: Mayor Nicol, Councilman Garruzzo, Mr. Harman, Mr. O'Donnell and Mr. Sarnasi. Alternate members Murdoch, Stango and Thornton then came up to the dais to hear this matter. Tim Sigler had listened to the tapes of the original hearing so was eligible to vote tonight.

Mr. C. Keith Henderson, Esq. came forward and told the Board he had been in contact with Christopher Stracco; Esq., the attorney for Citron, LLC who owns the property next door to the Yacht Club and certain stipulations have been agreed on. Mr. Henderson asked: o read these into the rebord; as follows:

1. The Club would agree as a condition of approval that it will not utilize Riverview Lane to access the sailing center for any purposes other than emergencies and for deliveries of equipment. All other ingress and egress for the sailing center and drop-offs and pick-ups will be at the Club's main entrance where it currently occurs: Sign would be posted prohibiting dropping off,and picking up of students in the rear of the new sailing center. A chain would be installed at the intersection of Riverview" Lane and the driveway of the sailing center, which chain would be locked during all regattas and junior sailing programs.
2. The Club would agree to a condition of approval that: (a) the new sailing center would not be open to the general public, and (b) would only be open for use by full members and guests of the Club or any hosted regattas.
3. The Club would agree to a condition of approval that the hours of operation of the sailing center would be from 1/2 hour before dawn to 11:00 pm for all activities.
4. The Club would agree to a condition of approval that the new sailing center would not be used for dinners, parties, catered events or social events, other than the sailing program and educational events related to the sailing program. Nothing shall prohibit the outdoor barbecues which ard currently provided on the river side of the sailing center for participants in the sailing programs.
5. The Club would agree to a condition of approval that would limit the use of the entire sailing center second floor attic for storage and not for office, social or other related uses.
6. The Club would agree to a condition of approval that no waste/garbage disposal and removal containers or pick-up occur at the new sailing center. All waste/garbage disposal and removal containers or pick-up occur at the main Clubhouse.
7. The Club would agree to a condition of approval to plant and maintain shrubbery or an additional landscape barrier and screen between the sailing center and the Citron property. A revised landscape plan will be provided to the Board in connection with the application for review and consideration by the Board and the public.
8. The Club would agree, as a condition of approval, that the Club prohibit parking either by members or valets on Riverview Lane, except for delivery of sailing and related equipment to the sailing center and/or removal of the same.

In addition to the above, Mr. Henderson said they will provide a copy of the landscape plans that were spoken of in item #7 to Mr. Stracco for approval. As far as item #8 there is no parking on Riverview Lane anyway. At this time Ned Thomson, Commodore of the Club, agreed on the stipulations. Mr. Henderson continued that, if any of the stipulations become unworkable, they would like to come back; also, these stipulations apply to the new area and not the existing club. Mr. Stracco came forward, representing the Citrons, and agreed to the conditions and also any modifications coming back to the Board for lot 8. He requested that the stipulations be a condition of approval.

Mr. Condon then opened the hearing to the public for any objections or questions on the stipulations; hearing none, that portion was closed.

Mr. Charles Gilligan, Engineer, then came forward and was sworn in; as the Board was very familiar with his credentials, he was accepted as an expert witness. Before he started, the stipulation request Was marked as Exhibit J-1 and a Design Grading Plan marked as Exhibit A-5. Mr. Gilligan said they need a variance for parking as they need 94 spaces and have 73, they also need a variance for the curb cut which is closer than 5 feet to the adjoining property; there is also aside setback variance as they need 5 feet and have a little under 4 feet proposed. He said the utilities that served the previous structure will be used for this new structure. Exhibit A-6 was then marked, the Architect's plan for the new construction which showed the front elevations and the basement. As far as the parking, there will be provided one space for handicap and that is all; they have a lift and can change that to a ramp if needed which can also apply to the picking up of masts and sails. The existing driveway will not be moved and there will be no detriment to the public good on this project as well as no impact to the Zoning Ordinance or Zoning Plan.

Mr. Gilligan went on to say they are working with the existing site, there was a structure there that was taken down and a new one will be put up continuing the use. Mr. Sigler asked about a monitor well and Commodore Thomson said this is a temporary one and will be removed after one more test to make sure all is safe. Mrs. Murdoch asked what the existing garage is use for and was told storage. Mr. Langenberger asked what the width was of Riverview Lane and was told 16 feet. Mr. Langenberger said he was concerned for fire safety, there is an 8" loop main on the southerly side and he would like to have an additional fire hydrant put in; if the street were wider the one existing hydrant would be okay but the Fire Company has a large diameter hose and the entire road would be shut off without water. He had spoken to Mr. Hilla on this and they came up with three possible locations where one can be put into avoid closing down the entire street from water. Mr. Henderson was agreeable to work with the Fire Company on this issue as well as Commodore Thomson. Mr. Langenberger asked that this be put in the Resolution of Approval. Mr. Henderson felt that was okay but just wanted the Board Engineer and his Engineer be able to work on this.
At this time the hearing was opened to questions to Mr. Gilligan and, as there none, that portion was closed.

Cheryl Bergailo, a Licensed Planner in N.J. then came forward and was sworn in. She presented Exhibit A-7, an area context map which was an aerial view of the property from different directions. She said this application requires a D2 Variance as well as bulk variances for parking. The Use Variance comes in for the use of this property as a Junior Sailing Program and she felt this use is inherently beneficial as defined by the Municipal Land Use Law. This use is also for health, safety and welfare; the club is a member of the US Sailing Association and has safety as well as-training standards and the use is suited to the.site as it can be considered water dependent and on a State waterway. She referred to several cases in court that upheld granting of Use Variances and stated the application advances the planning, criteria A (development of land properly) , Criteria 0 (provide recreational use, both public and private) and Criteria I (creative development techniques). There will be no detriment to the public good as this use has been going on here since the early 1900s.

She went on to say there will be no new parking on the site and this application complies with the R-2 bulk standards and will look like a residence; a landscape buffer will be provided — the positives outweigh the negatives. Other uses allowed in the R-2 zone are churches, government buildings, etc. so this use is consistent with the zone; it is not specified in the Zone Plan but to do so may appear as "spot zoning". The 2002 Master. Plan Update talks about recreational activities and environmental uses being compatible with existing uses, so this use is supported by the Brielle Master Plan.- The Master Plan also speaks of long term use in Brielle as being a valuable use and of a Maritime Center. In terms of the parking variance the extra spaces are not really needed as this is a Junior Sailing Program and children will be dropped off, not driving in; the existing driveway will stay as it is and it can be chained.

As the Board members had no questions, the hearing was open to the public for questions to Mr. Bergailo and Mr. Robert Houseal of 608 Rankin Road came forward and was sworn in. He asked a series of questions to Ms. Bergailo until Mr. Rubino asked him to make his point as the hearing is only scheduled for 45 minutes. Mr. Houseal then referred to page 2215 of the Brielle Zoning Ordinance and asked Ms. Bergailo to read a portion of it: "non-conformities can stay but if removed should not be continued unless it can conform to standards." He then asked her to read page 2217 and Mr. Henderson objected as he felt this was irrelevant; Mrs. Vitale interjected that she felt Mr. Houseal was "badgering" the witness. To move things along, Mr. Condon gave Mr. Houseal three more questions to ask. Mr. Houseal asked Ms Bergailo if she was familiar with 3 court cases referred to in William Cox's book on Municipal Land Use, these cases referred to private clubs. Mr. Henderson again objected; Mr. Houseal said he hoped the Board listened carefully.

As there were no further public questions, that portion was closed. Mr. Henderson said he would sum up when the Board and the public made their comments and, as the Board had no other comments than what had already been discussed, the hearing was opened to the public for general comments; each speaker would get 3 minutes to speak.

Mr. Houseal came forward again and referred to the William Cox book, page 87, where it speaks of a private club that sought a variance for a pool that was overturned by the courts. He said private club applications have been overturned because they are just that, private clubs; he referred to another application that was overturned for tennis courts. He felt that asking for a D2 variance was wrong and an application for a D1 variance should have been sought; therefore the wrong, notifications were-given on this application. Brielle's Land Use Ordinahoe says that once a nonconforming use stops it is extinguished, so the applicant here is asking for a resurrection of this- use; Mr, Rubino agreed this raises an issue and asked Mr. Henderson about acquiring the lot from the neighbors. Mr. Henderson said there was a 99 year lease for the front of this property for the school, the person who lived there permitted the,schootto be held in his front yard. Now the club has taken this portion of that land back and there would be a question of whether or not the lots merged; he assumed the Tax Assessor would merge them.

Mr. Rubino asked him about Mr. Houseal's comments and Mr. Henderson said the testimony for a D1 or D2 variance is the same and the use is inherently beneficial; whether the lots are merged or not is irrelevant: He also noted that both theiZoning Office and Board Engineer agreed this is a D2 variance request; he finished by again stating there will be no detriment to the public good. Mr. Rubino wondered if the cases cited really apply here and Ms. Bergailo said the Dl variance is the standerd ricl is more stringent and agreed this is an inherently beneficial use due to its waterfront location; the issue satisfies the Dl or D2 criteria. "Ms Odud .agreed 'with MsBerOilo that a Dl or D2 can be-applied here. MrRubino felt, that Mr. Houseal had a good point and if the Board has an option of accepting this application either way or questioning this. As there were no further comments from the audience, the open portion of the hearing was closed and Mr. Henderson came forward to sum up. He said the site has existed for decades and felt his conferences with Mr. Stracco are consistent with the applicant's request. The club bought the property to protect that use, the house was going to be used for storage but there was an oil spill and the structure needed to be torn down; the Use Variance is what this case is really about, the Junior Sailing Club.We live on the Manasquan River by the Atlantic Ocean and this program is good for our kids to learn, there are no other facilities like this on the Manasquan River. This use is inherently beneficial and the benefits outweigh the detriments.

As there was no further discussion by the Board members, Mr. Langenberger made a motion to approve this, with the stipulations from Mr. Citron's attorney and putting in a new fire hydrant. This motion was seconded by Mrs. Vitale, however, Mr. Condon spoke up and said he did not agree with the motion made by Mr. Langenberger regarding the fire hydrant. The building that was taken down did not have a fire code and the new one will so why put in another fire hydrant? Mrs. Vitale felt another fire hydrant was good and Mr. Sigler noted it may help with their insurance. Mr. Rubino said they have to make a finding that this use is inherently beneficial or not. Mr. Condon felt the testimony supports this use and Mr. Sigler agreed. Mrs. Vitale commented that the testimony stated there will be no neW members being added and felt this application was a good thing. Mr. Thornton did have a. question on the D1 or D2 variance issue, these are highly paid individuals that may not have gotten, it right Mrs. Murdoch felt the Board has to work with this and said it was .beneficial.. Mr. Stenson agreed with the testimony given and the D1 and D2 variances are the same here; Mr. Stango said he would also support this application.

As there was already a motion and second on the table, the following roll call vote was then taken:
Ayes: Thomas Condon, James Langenberger, Gina Murdoch, Tim Sigler, Nicholas Stango, James Stenson, Terre Vitale

Noes: None

Not Eligible to vote:.Spencer Thornton (only 7-members can vote on a Use
Variance according to Mr. Rubino)

The Board then turned to an application for Site Plan, approval for Block 65.01, Lot 8, 629 Higgins Avenue, owned by M. Hoitzrhah Realty, LLC; to allow construction of an indoor swimming pool. Off Street Parking — 231 spaces required, 223 spaces provided, variance requested for 8 spaces. Loading Space —2 spaces required, 0 spaces provided, variance requested for 0 spaces.

The fees had been paid, taxes are paid to date and the property owners within 200 feet as well as the newspaper had been properly notified. Before starting this hearing, there was again a shift in the Board members as some had to step down due to being members of the Sports Club: Councilman Garruzzo, Mr. Condon, Mr. Harman,Mr. Sarnasi, Mrs. Vitale (note: Mrs. Murdoch and Mr. Stango remained on the dais). Mr. Stenson, Vice-Chairperson, took over.

Mayor Nicol commented his wife was a member but he had never set foot in the Club and did not feel this would stop him from casting a vote; all attorneys involved were agreeable to this so Mayor Nicol stayed on the dais.

Mr. Roger McLaughlin came forward to represent Joe Penniplede, the owner of the Sports Club. He reminded the Board that they had filed an application last year for an indoor swimming pool and has asked for variances for a 50 foot buffer as well as parking; they withdrew that application and are now back with a new, modified one that needs no variances but they are asking for "green banking" of spaces which means that if needed, they will be put in; they would like to keep a green area. They moved the pool so it is not in the 50 foot buffer area and are not adding to the nonconformity that exists on the building. They felt this pool will improve business and be a positive for the Brielle Business Center.

Mr. Scott Keneally,, Esq..came forward as an objector, he represented himself and his wife; they live behind the Sports Club, Mr. Rubino had received a letter from him in reference to some Board members being in the Club but that had been'taken care of by the Board members themselves stepping down. Mr. Keneally questioned the existing nonconforming portion of the building needing a variance; Mr. Rubino said they do not have a copy of the Resolution for the Shop,Rite,building that was built many years ago but they do have a copy of the Resolution from 2004 for the Sports Club but that variance was never addressed and it should be. There is also a question of whether the proposed pool is a permitted use in this zone. In Mr. Rubino's opinion the Board should listen to the testimony and make that determination and; if it is deemed not to be a permitted use, then a Use Variance is needed.

Mr. Keneally said he has not agreed to the parking scenario and did not agree, with the numbers presented as well as the landscaping but he did agree talisten to the application first. At this time Mr. Joseph Pennipiede came forward and wassworn in, he gave his address as 2567 River Road in Wall Twp. and he has owned the Sports Club since 2004. He has been with numerous health clubs, owned one in Brick which was a Powerhouse Gym; he then came to Brielle and opened the Brielle Sports Club and has now expanded to a second Sports Club in Wall. He said a lot of members of the Club have been asking for a pool as they do not want to go to other facilities and the landlord thought it was a good idea as well. It will be a salt water pool as he felt that was better than a fresh water pool with chlorine.

The Sports Club has equipment rooms, spin rooms, yoga room, etc. as well as child care. He said the swimming pool will be maintained by a local contractor and parking is adequate; he has never seen the lot full. They have a surveillance system in place for the lot as well as internal surveillance. Mr. McLaughlin asked about theloading space and that it is not accessible. Mr. Penniplede said usually trucks use the front entrance, large trucks won't even fit in the back and there is no need for loading for tractor trailers.

At this time the hearing was opened for questions to Mr. Penniplede and Mr. Keneally came forward and asked how many members there are - the answer was about 3,500 active. He then asked where else in the area is there an indoor pool and Mr. Penniplede said The Atlantic Club and one of the schools in Neptune Township, he did not know of any other ones. Mr. Keneally asked if Mr. Penniplede knew of any in Ocean County and he said he knew there was one at Bally's, Toms River Fitness and private places as well as the YMCA. Mr. Keneally asked if there are any members of his Sports Club who come from Ocean County and Mr. Penniplede said there are some members from Point Pleasant and Brick. Mr. Keneally asked how the Ilse of the pool will be handled and Mr. Penniplede Said it will be an add-on to the membership fee. Mr. Keneally asked if people can just pay to go to the pool and the answer was no - one has to be a member. Mr. Keneally asked if any teams will be using the pool and Penniplede said no one has approached him on this but it may be possible to rent lanes. Mr. Keneally asked how large the pool was and was told 50'175Y which is a Junior Olympic size— 6-lanes: Mr. Keneally asked if he knew the size of the pool at the Atlantic Club and he did not Mr. Keneally said that is a 5 lane Pool and asked why Mr. Penniplede wanted 6 lanes; he said he talked to the members and most Wanted 6 lanes. There will be classes for water aerobics, swim lessons, maybe swim camps, he did not know. Mr. Keneally asked about bus parking for teams and Mr. Pennplede said if there were teams it would be when the Club is less busy and they can park in the rear of the lot. It was requested that the Lighting/Landscaping Plan be marked as Exhibit A-1 and this was done. Mr. Keneally wanted to know where the busses would be parked on the map. Mr. McLaughlin objected to this as it is not in the Club's plans now. Mr. Rubino felt the question should be answered so Mr. Penniplede showed in the front or on the side when they are not busy. Mr. Keneally asked what time would the teams use the Club and Mr. Penniplede said he did not knciw, but would thing either early morning or after school. Mr. Keneally asked about the depth of the pool and was told that is to be determined but it probably would go to 10 feet with a diving platform. Mr. Keneally noted a Mezzanine on the plans and asked what that would be for and the answer was for parents who want to watch their kids. Mr. Keneally asked about the Loading Zone and does the liquor store next door need this; Mr. Penniplede said they have their own entrance.

Mr. Keneally then wanted to know who dictated this location and Mr. McLaughlin said the Architect will address that. Mr. Keneally asked if the location of the pool has any significance and Mr. Penniplede said it benefits Mr. Keneally's house as it creates a bigger buffer zone, they can't move it closer to the front. Mr. McLaughlin objected as Mr. Keneally was pointing to the outside and they do have the floor plans for the indoor pool. Mr. Penniplede said that where the pool will be located is more suitable for parking and the building itself. Mr. McLaughlin added that, in the original location they did not need a hallway and, in this plan, they do. Mr. Keneally asked if there would be anything to prevent the owner from not moving the tanning salon and Mr. Penniplede said they are separate rooms and cannot get to the pool through the tanning salon.

Mr. Mark Morro of Locust Road was next to'come forward and be sworn in. He said he and his wife were members of the Club as well as their neighborS. He didn't understand the comments made that only members of the Club would be allowed to use the pool and then it was said that teams could use the facilities. Mr. McLaughlin said Mr. Penniplede has not heard from any schools for this. Mr. Morro sked about traffic control if this did happen; he likened this to Silton Swim School; MF. Penniplede said they are not Silton Swim School. Mr. Morrow felt if it were for members only that would be fantastic but he was concerned with traffic and Mr. McLaughlin, said this can be addressed by the Engineer.

Mr. Scott Frith of 605. Sandy Court came forward and was sworn!in, He abuts the property and he has Spoken to the town about the berms and landscaping; he was concerned about headlight shining through. Mr. McLaughlin again referred to the Engineer that will testify.
Priscilla Fitzsimmons of 625 Locust Road then came forward and was sworn in. She said back in 2004 they were promised trees and buffer and that never happened. She was concerned for teams coming and noted, back in 2004, it was only opened to Brielle — she was concerned about trees.

Karen Crines of 613 Locust Road came forward and was sworn in. She said back in 2004 the proposed membership was 2,500 and 300-400 coming in daily. She asked ig Mr. Penniplede knew the numbers now and the answer Was no.

Noni Dickerson of 618 Locust Road was next to be sworn in. She thought there was supposed to be limitations to the membership and it has gone from 2,500 to 3,500. She noted there is a lot of noise in parking, this Club was to be for adults only and now there are kids and this is before a pool, how is the Board going to look at this? Mr. Rubino said the Board sees there is an issue with the pool and during the course of the hearing all will be addressed. At this time there are only questions to Mr. Penniplede. Mrs. Dickerson asked if he was going to limit the membership and Mr. Penniplede said he did not anticipate 10,000 people joining, this is adding to his business to keep up and he is down 500 members now from his peak so a difference will not be seen; he commented they do not let summer people in and they are not going to open the pool to the public. He could not predict the future but even with 500 new members they will be where they were at their peak. Mrs. Dickerson was concerned with the buffer zone and asked if a Fire Zone is needed back there and where will it go, and are there County and State regulations. Mr. Rubino said the Engineer will address that and Mr. McLaughlin said the County and State do not have jurisdiction for this application.

Mr. McLaughlin asked Mr. Penniplede what would happen if he could not get people to work out on equipment because there were too many members and the answer was he would have to address the problem and stop members from coming in. Mr. McLaughlin commented this would be counter-productive. Mr. Keneally asked what the occupancy limit is and Mr. Penniplede did not know; Mr. McLaughlin said the Architect can answer that.

Kelly Keneally then came forward and was sworn in but Mrs. Brisben questioned her being able to speak as herhusband said he was representing both her and him. Mr. Rubino said she could ask a question. She wanted when there will be a discussion on the allowance of swim teams and Mr. McLaughlin said he did not have an answer as it is not an intended use; this is a Health Club and they want to put in a pool for its members, they are not seeking a use for team swimming. Mrs. Keneally said her friends have children who practice in Neptune and there are people dropping off 'and picking up and it is busy. Mr. Penhiplede again said he was not sure if he is having. swim teams and could only envision two busses and some cars; he felt it was worse in the mornings when women come in for Zumba class but there is no craziness with parking and cars going in and out.

At this time Mr. Stenson noted the Board had spent 50 minutes on this application and it will now be carried to the April 10th meeting of the Board without further notice.

As there was no further business to come before the Board, a motioh was made by Mayor Nicol to adjourn, this seconded by Mrs. Murdoch and approved unanimously by the Board, all aye. The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 pm.

Karen Brisben, Recording secretary