The September 13 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board had three applications for review on the agenda. The first application was for a minor subdivision of an over-sized lot located on 20th Street. The second was for a major preliminary site plan approval. And the third was for a two-family dwelling on 21st Street.

1. Regarding the first application, the owner, Thomas Welsh, requested approval to subdivide his 100- by 130-foot lot into two conforming lots. The Borough has an easement on the property for a storm water pipe. The Borough and the Applicant have entered into an agreement with respect to the storm pipe, contingent upon the Planning and Zoning Board granting the requested subdivision. The agreement would permit the removal of the current storm pipe to the new center line of the two conforming lots. All of the specifications for the new pipe location and installation would be set by the Borough’s engineers and would be at Mr. Welsh’s expense. Since the property is in a multifamily zone, its subdivision would permit the construction of a duplex on each new lot.
   

   Several area residents that were present were opposed to permitting the construction of two duplexes which would inflate the already difficult parking problem in the area. The requested subdivision, however, was a matter of right, and the Board approved the application.

2. The second application, which was for Major Preliminary and Final Site Plan approval, basically involved renovations to the Sea Grill. The renovations involved adding outside dining at the side of the building, creating decorative screening around the outdoor dining area, relocating a stairwell to the third floor office area, removing a nonconforming sign, installing a clock tower, and reducing the roof overhang from 26 feet to 17 feet.

   Presently the property has 76 parking spaces where 49 are required. The plan submitted would reduce the spaces by six due to proposed sidewalk alterations to access the outdoor dining. After considerable discussion, the Applicant agreed to redesign the parking so that only three spaces would be eliminated.

   The Applicant noted that although the current roof overhang of 26 feet is nonconforming, the proposed reduction makes it less nonconforming. The Board, however, pointed out that any change to a nonconforming requirement, even if it were for the better, still required a variance. The Applicant, rather than applying for a variance, agreed to amend the site plan to make the roof overhang conforming.

   There was a disagreement on the number of tables permitted for outdoor dining. Ultimately, the Applicant agreed to limit seating to 15 tables.

   Subject to numerous conditions, the application was approved.

3. Turning now to the third application, the Applicant was seeking a Use Variance for a two family home at 2389 Ocean Drive. Presently, the building on the site houses the Hodge Podge on the first floor and a residential unit on the second floor. The need for a Use Variance arises from the fact that the property is in two zones — the B1 business zone and the R2a residential zone.

   The Applicant pointed out that the current structure has a number of nonconforming set backs, no buffer zone, and no green space, all of which would be rectified by granting the variance. Additionally, the Applicant noted that the character of the surrounding area is residential.

   For a Use Variance to be granted, five out of seven eligible Board members must be in favor of the variance. In this instance the grant was denied.

During the public comment session, one member of the public basically asserted that the process for amending the Master Plan to provide a basis for the Planning and Zoning Board to draft an ordinance permitting boutique hotels in the Bl business district was fatally flawed. Among the reasons she cited for the assertion were that: (i) the public was not properly given notice in a meeting agenda; (ii) at the meeting a map of the area of interest was not provided for public view; (iii) the amendment does not define a boutique hotel; (iv) and the amendment does not fix the zone under consideration with specificity, but refers only to the area as the main business zone. She also requested again that Board members use the microphones so that they can be heard, and that the Board display all documents on the monitors in the hearing room.

Another person, who said he had chaired a Zoning Board in another community, urged the Board to use electronic media in order to make Board meetings more accessible to the public.