Recap of April 3, ‘23 Wildwood Planning and Zoning Meeting
Submitted by Kathy Fulginiti
The City of Wildwood Planning & Zoning board meets the first Monday of every month at 6 pm in the City Hall Commissioner’s Meeting Room, 4400 New Jersey Ave, Wildwood NJ 08260. View agendas and plans beforehand at city hall during their business hours (M-F 8 am - 4 pm). Members of the public are allowed to attend and offer public comment on most agenda items. Zoom attendance is currently discontinued.
Planning and Zoning Meeting Notes Date: Apr. 3, 2023 Submitted by Kathy Fulginiti
Property Address: 2600 Atlantic Ave. (Roxy’s Liquors) Applicant: 2600 Park, Inc/dba Roxy’s Liquors
Attorney: Ron Gelzunas Engineer: Mr. Hender
Owner: Thomas and Roseann Karter Consultant: Mr. Hender
Site Plan: Preliminary and Final Number of Stories: n/a
Zoned: High Density Residential (R-3)
Property frontage: Atlantic Ave: 79.25’, Juniper Ave.: 41.9’, 26th St.: 46.653’ Width: 41.9’ Depth: 44.22’ (90’ required) Area: 3520 sq. ft.
Variances: use: needed - pre-existing non-conforming hardship: needed substantial benefit: yes
Front yard setback: 26th st. Required: 10’ Proposed: .04’ pre-existing non-conforming
Front yard setback: Atlantic Ave. Required: 10’ Proposed: 1.5 pre-existing non-conforming
Side yard setback: Required: Proposed: n/a
Back yard setback: Required: 15’ Proposed: 3.2’ pre-existing non-conforming
Height: Required: 35’ Proposed: < 35’ Conforms
Building coverage: Required: 45% Proposed: 32.5% Conforms
Lot area coverage: Required: 70% Proposed: 95.68% pre-existing non-conforming
Parking: Required: 6 spaces Proposed: 6 spaces Conforms
Accessory Building: Required: 4’ Proposed: .7’
Proposal: The applicant plans to expand an existing non-conforming use and structure. They want to use a section of the parking area to make an outdoor container bar and cafe with six seats. The parking lot will retain six spots and be changed into an area of interest that can be seen from Atlantic Avenue. An accessory structure will be built. It will conform to all requirements except for being .7’ from the property line. Most patrons are expected to be walk-ins. The use variance is needed since the zoning area does not permit retail use (What is there is pre-existing non-conforming, and the owner wants to expand.) The property fronts on Atlantic, Juniper, and 26th. Six variances are being sought.
Additional notes: The building is currently a package goods store and a small bar. The owner’s daughter, Ashley, was there to explain things more fully. The accessory building will be a shipping container that measures 8’x20’ and faces Atlantic Avenue. A bulk variance is needed since it will sit more than 8’ from the existing building. A fence that is 4’ high will remain in the back of the property. The area will be landscaped with a beachy theme that includes beach balls. The store and bar are expected to close by 11 pm. There have been no complaints from neighbors over the years. The tables will be of the cocktail variety. Beer, wine, and mixed drinks will be served in plastic cups. No live bands or amplified music will happen. Delivery trucks will utilize the parking lot for deliveries. Since the area is already well-lit, no further lighting is expected, other than maybe some decorative lighting. The Board asked that a fence separate the bar area from the parking section. The new bar section will only be open in the summer. An extended license is needed from the city.
Public Comments: One neighbor said the owners are good neighbors but was worried about the noise level and people loitering in the area. Ashley assured her that things will be under control. Another neighbor stated that there is nothing wrong with the plan and that since it’s already a busy section he didn’t see the changes making much of a difference.
Motion: Yes 7 with 1 recuse No None Motion passed unanimously.
************
The following application is a complicated one. There are several properties involved within the same block. It is being treated as one application, but there are 4 different sets of plans, one for each proposed lot.
Property Address: 3700 Pacific Ave. Lots 27.01 (150-152 E. Lincoln), 27.02 (154-156 E. Lincoln), 27.03 (158-160 E. Lincoln), and 28.01 (163, 165, 167, 169 E. Garfield) If subdivision is approved, the lot numbers will become 35, 36, 37, and 15, respectively. Applicant: 3700 Pacific Ave., LLC
Attorney: John Amenhauser Engineer: Mr. Hender Architect: Brian Newswanger
Owner: BG Capitol/ Gratia Realty Holdings/ C. Barron, LLC Consultant:
Site Plan: preliminary and final site approval Number of Stories: Ground floor garage with 2 stories above
Zoned: Downtown Center Subzone of the Pacific Avenue Redevelopment Zone
Property frontage: 170’ (Lot 27) ; 109’ (Lot 28.01) Width: ? Depth: 100’ (Lots 27 & 28.01) Total Area: 17,000 (Lot 27) ; 10,900 (Lot 28.01) = 27900 sq.ft.
Variances: Use: not needed hardship: not needed substantial benefit: needs variance
For lot 27.01: Width Required: 100’ Width Proposed: 56.67’
For lot 27.01: Side yard setback: Required: 10’ Proposed: 4.25’ and 4.44’
For lot 27.01: Lot area coverage: Required: 8000 sq. ft. Proposed: 5667 sq. ft.
Front yard setback: Required: 10’ Proposed: 10’ In compliance
Side yard setback: Required: 10’ Proposed: 4.25’ and 4.44’
Backyard setback: Required: 10’ Proposed: 12.36’ In compliance
Height: Required: 40’ (for this area, I believe) Proposed: 40’.7’ (In one section of the application it said that height was in compliance, and in another, it said that a variance was needed.)
Building coverage: Required: 80% Proposed: 60.8% In compliance
Lot area coverage: Required: 80% Proposed: 78.9% In compliance
Parking: Required: 2 Proposed: 2 In compliance
Minor Subdivision (Later changed to major subdivision.)
Requests waiver from environmental impact statement.
Proposal: The applicant wishes to demolish all standing structures on the properties to make way for four separate stacked townhouse units, with one building on each lot. There would be a total of 20 residential units. They are seeking a substantial benefit variance in that the new development will take the place of existing structures that are “dilapidated, offer no aesthetic quality, and do not bolster other recent development in the general vicinity of the subject property.” Variances are being sought for minimum lot area, minimum lot area and width, minimum front yard setback along Pacific Avenue, and minimum side yard setbacks. Also requested is a waiver from the environmental impact statement.
Additional Notes: Three lots on Lincoln will have 4 units and the one on Garfield will have 8 units for a total of 20 residences. According to the architect, this is an efficient use of the land, and actually reduces impervious structures. Street run-off will also be reduced due to the run-off being stored in infiltration structures that lie between buildings. It isn’t until those structures are filled that any water will run into the street. The Board questioned the side yard setbacks and was told that there will be 8 feet between buildings. Bump-outs are not bigger than a foot. Parking was discussed at great length. The city will lose six metered parking spots. Some buildings will have closed garages while others have permanent openings for cars to park within. Storage sections for each unit are provided within the garage, as are trash receptacles. The distance from a closed garage door to the sidewalk is 20’10”. The garages for some units have two spots each in the “backyard” that butt up against each other. Access is gained through the permanent garage opening. Those parking spots prompted the Board to ask about the separation of the parking from the actual yard. The architect replied that there will be landscaping around the spaces. The Board said that parking that is on property has to have a 5’ masonry wall around it. The architect wanted to keep the landscaping, but the Board held out for the masonry wall. The City Engineer pointed out that the subdivisions are major, not minor, and requested that the error be corrected in the record.
Public Comments: A neighbor on Lincoln Avenue talked about the difficulties of finding enough parking in the summer as it is. The flooding on Pacific and Lincoln was also a concern, as was the lack of retail space in the construction. Another gentleman complimented the plans but was also concerned about the parking situation and wished stores were included. A business person had also hoped stores were incorporated into the design. Someone else mentioned that the plans look good and is glad there are no garages fronting Pacific Avenue. The residential nature of the construction should help stimulate business along the downtown area and encourage more stores to open. The length of the driveway was also a concern since so many new buildings around town have driveways that are too short, leaving cars blocking sidewalks.
Motion: Yes 8 No None Motion passed unanimously.
************
Public Comments after the Meeting: I asked a few questions after the meeting. -What is the difference between minor and major subdivisions? Answer : Major subdivisions involve 4 or more lots while minor subdivisions deal with three or fewer. -Sometimes lawyers answer the public concerns within the speaker’s comments while others don’t answer until after all public comments are done. If a lawyer answers at the very end, but does not address the public’s concerns, can the public then ask for clarification? Answer: No. The lawyers are not required to answer the questions. It is up to them what they answer. -If plans change between the approval and construction, do the builders have to come back to the Planning and Zoning Board? Answer: It depends. If the change is very minor and has little impact, then no. Anything major must come back to the Board. (My reason for asking this concerned the warehouse at Hudson and Cedar. There was supposed to be new construction built on top of the existing one-story building. The one-story section is now marked with X’s, while the two-story section says “no demo.” The Board was not familiar with this development, but the Board’s engineer says he remembers a letter about it and to call him later. In a subsequent call the engineer, Anthony Chadwell, said that a structural engineer deemed the foundation of the building inadequate to hold the weight of two additional floors. Therefore, it has to be demoed, but must stick to the approved footprint and plans.)
The City of Wildwood Planning & Zoning board meets the first Monday of every month at 6 pm in the City Hall Commissioner’s Meeting Room, 4400 New Jersey Ave, Wildwood NJ 08260. View agendas and plans beforehand at city hall during their business hours (M-F 8 am - 4 pm). Members of the public are allowed to attend and offer public comment on most agenda items. Zoom attendance is currently discontinued
To join to our FREE email notification list, click here.
