Board of Adjustment

April 3, 2025 The April 3, 2025 Special Meeting of the Board of Adjustment opened at 7:30pm. The clerk read the notice of compliance with the "Open public meetings act." Present were Board members: Kelly, Dixon, Reynolds, McFadden, Dealmeida, McGee, Loder and Struncius Absent – Davis, Pasola and Neill Also, present – Ben Montenegro, Esq, Board attorney and Ray Savacool, Board PE and Karen L. Mills clerk to the Board. Court Reporter – Denise Sweet Memorialize minutes Memorialize resolutions Motion by Mr. Loder, second by Ms. McFadden to memorialize the action and vote approving application #2025-11 of Tracy Van Dorpe – 197 Trenton Court – with conditions In favor: McFadden, Reynolds, Loder and Struncius Opposed: None Agenda #2025-08 – 413 Railroad Square, LLC (Lombardi residential) – Applicant wishes to develop 2-mixed use buildings with retail use on ground floor of both buildings., and 22 apartments split between both buildings John Jackson, attorney for applicant stated the Applicant seeks approval to construct two mixed use buildings with retail uses on the ground floor of both buildings and twenty-two apartments with a ground floor community room, parking and storage units as depicted on the plans submitted. Exhibits entered A1 – Variance Application A2 - Survey, by William P. Schemel, P.L.S. of FWH Associates, dated 4/25/04 (last rev. 12/2/24); Site Plan by Christopher Rosati, P.E. of FWH Associates, dated 12/20/04; Architectural Plans by John C. Am elchenko, R.A. of Aquatecture Associates, Inc. dated 10/18/23 (last rev. 12/20/24); Stormwater Management Report by Christopher Rosati, P.E. of FWH Associates, dated 12/12/24; Stormwater Operations and Maintenance Manual, dated 12/17/24; Traffic Report by John H. Rea and Scott Kennel of McDonough & Rea Associates, dated 12/26/24; and Drainage Area Maps by Christopher Rosati, P.E. of FWH Associates dated 12/20/24 & 12/30/24 A3 – Power Point Packet (24 pages) BOA1 – Board Engineer Report dated 3/17/25 Brian Murphy, P.E., sworn, stated that he is a licensed engineer in the State of NJ , credentials accepted, and in preparation for his testimony reviewed the Application, subject property, relevant Ordinances/Master Plan, viewed the surrounding neighborhood, and the Board engineer ’s report dated 3/17/25. A. The subject site contains Lots 13-15 and 17-19, total lot area of 41,547 SF where 5,000 SF is required in the zone. B. The parcel is located in the GC zone within the Downtown Historic Overlay District.  C. The site has street frontages on Rt.35N, McLean Avenue and Kinmouth Lane. D. Making reference to the site plan, he described the location and layout of the two buildings, courtyard and parking lot for the proposed development. E. He described the stormwater management plan which included the use of porous pavement and underground filtration. He opined that the proposed stormwater management plan adequately addresses stormwater runoff associated with the proposed development. F. He agreed as a condition to revise that plan to modify the trash enclosure location to the north (exact location/dimension to be subject to review and approval of the Board Engineer). The revision would also eliminate access to the enclosure from Kinmouth Lane (access solely from the parking lot on the subject property). G. He agreed as a condition to contact the neighboring property owner to seek consent to address the meandering driveway at the front (southeast) corner of the subject property to aesthetically incorporate that area with the development of the subject property. H. He described the proposed site lighting and agreed as a condition to amend the plans to provide a lighting plan that shall be subject to the review and approval of the Board Engineer. I. He stated that the parking met RSIS requirements for parking and provided adequate parking the uses proposed. He further believes that the site design provided for adequate circulation and means of ingress/egress for residents and visitors of the site, as well as delivery and refuse removal vehicles. J. He agreed as a condition that the Applicant must comply with the Borough affordable housing requirements. K. Confirming compliance with the ordinance (allows for apartment use above permitted retail), Applicant agreed as a condition that the proposal is for apartment use only (no separate fee simple ownership of the units allowed). Matthew Lombardi, applicant, sworn, stated that he is a principal owner and applicant and has a presence in the Borough, maintaining their main business office on Richmond Avenue. He stated that the intent of the project is for upscale luxury rental apartments above permitted retail. He sought through the architecture and materials to incorporate historic features of the downtown area in a modern design. The first floor utilizes brick while the upper levels utilize cedar shakes. The community center on the first floor is owner maintained (same as the other common areas of the site) but is a core amenity for the luxury apartments. It will be accessed by residents via key fob. Applicant agreed as a condition that the final construction shall be as depicted on the plans/renderings presented to the Board (as to design and materials). Justin Auciello, P.P., sworn, credentials accepted, stated that the he is a licensed professional planner in the State of NJ and in preparation for his testimony reviewed the Application, subject property, relevant Ordinances/Master Plan, viewed the surrounding neighborhood, and the Board engineer’s report dated 3/17/25. He believes that the application meets the criteria for the D (1) use variance required because the site properly and adequately accommodates the proposed development in a way that allows for modernization of the site; improved aesthetics; improved functionality for residents of the apartments; while creating no detriment to the surrounding properties and that the proposal provides special reasons for the D (1) and C (2) relief required as the application advances purposes of zoning as set forth in NJSA 40:55D-2 (a)(c)(g) and (i) – noting that the proposed use of the site for luxury apartments over permitted retail uses is particularly suited based on its location in the downtown area with proximity to the train station and walking distance to commercial establishments in the downtown district. It provides for a functional and aesthetic improvement to the site and takes advantage of the unique location; while the nonconformities create no detriment to the overall site plan design or function. The zoning benefits advance outweighs any detriment from the variance relief required from full Ordinance compliance and that there are no negative impacts created by the minimal deviations from strict compliance with the zoning ordinance and that the benefits advanced by the proposed development outweigh any detriments. Applicant agreed as a condition to amend the plans to provide for a formal landscape plan, subject to the review and approval of the Board Engineer. John Amelchenko, R.A., sworn, credentials accepted, stated he is licensed architect in the State of New Jersey and prepared the architectural plans for the mixed-use buildings submitted for approval. In referencing the renderings shown in Exhibit A3 (pages 6 and 7), he noted the combination of brick and cedar shakes together with roof cornices incorporated into the design to achieve an upscale aesthetic coastal design appropriate for the downtown historic overlay district. Referencing Exhibit A3 (pages 9-13), he described the building size and layout of the units. Building 1 is the larger of the two buildings. On the ground floor, the building provides for retail, parking stalls, storage units, and a community room. Applicant agreed as a condition that that parking and garage units as well as the community room are solely for tenant use. Referencing Exhibit A3 (page 14), he confirmed that the mechanicals are housed on the rooftop and accessed via stairs as shown on the plan. Applicant agreed as a condition that access/use of the rooftop (for both buildings) is for maintenance and repair of the air conditioning units on the rooftop. Use or access to the roof by tenants or guests for any type of recreation space is strictly prohibited. He described the floor plans which provide for ground floor retail with parking/storage and access to the duplex style apartment units in this building as depicted on the plans. Applicant agreed that signage proposed for the project shall fully comply with the Borough ’s sign ordinance. Scott Kennel, applicant’s traffic engineer, sworn, credentials accepted, stated he co-authored the traffic study (dated 12/26/24) submitted on behalf of the application and is fully familiar with the project, the site and surrounding areas. He believes that the proposed project provides for safe and adequate site ingress/egress and site circulation and that the proposed project provides for adequate parking. Applicant agreed as a condition to provide for designated tenant parking spaces so as to ensure that there is a minimum of 1 space designated for each apartment unit on site. He stated that the site design (with relocated trash enclosure) provides for adequate distance for a trash removal vehicle to access/depart the site from McLean Avenue. Jackson – summation – beautiful application – agreed to conditions – good location with brewery and train station Deliberation Dixon - When I saw this development I was pretty impressed with it. Right now, it is not much of a good look over there. Does not encroach on residential area; I see a need for one- and two- bedroom apartments. It will help the downtown shops – hope it looks just like this with the plantings. McFadden – When I initially reviewed these plans, I already had a positive view. We need to attract young professionals. This will be the look for our town on Route 35. You filled the positive criteria and Master plan. It fits into the historic overlay. Year-round residents with restaurant and stores in walking distance. Reynolds – Want to thank the professionals. I do not think it is over developed – will not detract from anything in the area. Glad we moved the trash. It is beautiful. The community room will add to the attraction. I think it is a good idea. Kelly – I appreciate the effort of the professionals. I hope it is set back far enough. Will be a good place for commuters – I like the design. I think the lane might be an issue but will resolve itself. McGee – Any opportunity to have a building like this as a focal point is a win. Might help some of the vacancies we have now. Dealmeida – I think it is a really nice-looking project. Having more rentals will be inherently affordable for young families. Everything has gotten so expensive. Glad you moved the trash enclosure. Loder - I’m impressed by how you took a challenging lot and made it conforming. Good looking project. Struncius - I think the special reasons of the general welfare, walking distance to the train stain, community and stores. Diversity of housing, outdoor spaces. We have the light and air – every inch is not jammed with building. We have one or two deminimis setbacks – by following the affordable housing the young professional will be able to afford and they will rent them. From the aesthetic look it is a positive 0 do not see any detriment what so ever. Conditions 1. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining any other approvals or permits from other governmental agencies, as may be required by law, including but not limited to the Municipality’s and State’s affordable housing regulations; and the applicant shall comply with any requirements or conditions of such approvals or permits. 2. The applicant must comply with the Development Fee Ordinance of the Borough of Point Pleasant Beach, if and to the extent applicable. 3. The applicant shall comply with all items set forth in the Board Engineer Report dated 3/17/25 unless specifically exempted herein. 4. Applicant shall provide a final as-built plan with an updated/corrected zoning chart to the Board’s Engineer for his review and approval. 5. The Applicant shall be responsible for the mitigation of any negative drainage impacts on adjacent properties which mitigation/drainage plan shall be consistent with and subject to the review and approval by the Board ’s Engineer. 6. The Applicant shall comply with the following special conditions: a. Applicant shall modify the plan to relocate the trash enclosure to the north and eliminate access to the enclosure from Kinmouth Lane. Final location/dimension subject to the review and approval of the Board Engineer. b. Applicant shall contact the adjoining property owner to seek consent to address the meandering driveway at the southeast corner of the subject property to aesthetically incorporate that area with the development of the subject property. c. Applicant shall provide a lighting plan, subject to the review and approval of the Board Engineer. d. Applicant shall comply with all Borough Affordable Housing ordinance requirements. e. The proposal approved is for residential apartment use only, no separate fee simple ownership of the residential units is allowed. f. Final construction shall be as depicted on the plans/renderings submitted (as to design and materials). g. Applicant shall provide a formal landscape plan, subject to the review and approval of the Board Engineer. h. The parking and/or storage units as well as the community room shall be available solely for tenant use. i. Access to the roof tops of the buildings shall be for maintenance/repair/replacement of the mechanical units on the rooftop. Use or access to the roof by tenants or guests for any type of recreation space is strictly prohibited. j. Applicant shall provide for designated tenant parking spaces to insure a minimum of one space for each apartment unit on site. k. Applicant shall consolidate lots 13-15 & 17-19 by deed of consolidation, said deed subject to the review and approval of the Board Engineer and Board Attorney. Motion by Mr. Dixon, second by Ms. McFadden to approve application #2025-08 – 413 Railroad Square, LLC (Lombardi residential) with conditions In favor: Dixon, McFadden, Reynolds, Kelly, McGee, DeAlmeida and Struncius Opposed: None Application approved with conditions. Meeting adjourned at 10:35pm Attest: Karen L. Mills, LUA Clerk of the Board.