BOROUGH OF WEST CAPE MAY
PLANNING-ZONING BOARD
REGULAR MEETING – February 26, 2008

The Regular Meeting of the Borough of West Cape May Planning-Zoning Board, held at the Municipal Building, 732 Broadway, was called to order by Chairperson Novak at 7:00 PM.  After reading the Open Public Meetings Act of 1975 he led all present in the flag salute.

ROLL CALL:
Members: Doris Jacobsen present
Dick Rigby present
Art Joblin present
Chris Shriver absent
Pam Kaithern  present
Chris Wood absent
Gary Novak present
Alternates:
Kevin O’Neill  present
Mark Kulkowitz absent
Diane Rea present
Archie Garnett present

Also Present:
Brock Russell, Esq., Board Solicitor
Ray Roberts, Planning Board Engineer
Elaine Wallace, Recording Secretary

Wilbraham Mansion, LLC, 133 Myrtle Avenue, Block 4, Lot 6, Application 01-08
Chairperson Novak advised the public that Dick Rigby has recused himself from the hearing based on previous business relations with the property owner.  Mr. Novak also announced that Archie Garnett has listened to the tapes of the February 12th meeting and will be permitted to vote at this meeting.  After a brief review, Mr. DeSanto entered a site plan as Exhibit 10 in response to the previous discussion.  Then he called Thomas Fik who was once again sworn in by Brock Russell.  Mr. Fik prepared the plans and spoke with Engineer Roberts.  He reviewed the plans that would include gravel pavers, curbing, and a recharge trench filled with river rock.  There would be no runoff onto adjacent properties.

Lewis Conley, Jr. was sworn in by Brock Russell once again.  Mr. Conley met with the electric company and the water/sewer department to determine placement of utility lines.  Mr. Conley asserted that the revised plans addressed all concerns raised.  A preliminary landscape plan was prepared that afternoon and called for specific species and numbers of plants.  The preliminary landscape plan was marked Exhibit 11.  The applicant testimony was complete at this time.

Ray Roberts, Board Engineer, was sworn in by Solicitor Russell.  Mr. Roberts asserted the storm drainage calculations met requirements.  He had a question on what would happen to the tree line along CVS under the proposed sanitary sewer and water lateral plan.  Mr. Conley is hoping to save the trees because the proposed line is only 3 feet deep.  Mr. Roberts will speak with the Water/Sewer Supervisor to discuss his concerns.  Ray Roberts stated the applicant has addressed his concerns and asked for a complete submission of just the missing and corrected items and plans.  He will then give a new report.  Solicitor Russell asked Mr. Roberts if he was satisfied that all items are acceptable and the board could approve the application conditional on the Engineer’s approval of the final plans.  Mr. Robert was satisfied that his concerns had been met, just a few miscellaneous matter needed to be corrected.  Mr Russell was satisfied, but wants to see the submittal in writing.

Mr. DeSanto had one final set of comments.  The applicant is asking for a parking surface waiver but felt the pavers would be more pervious and more aesthetically pleasing; a waiver for the number of parking spaces, which is already nonconforming, but the nonconformity will be decreased; and a waiver for the buffer for the reasons given during testimony.  The applicant believes a vegetative waiver is not necessary because the minimum is 35% and the plan calls for 35.05%, thus meeting the requirement.  Mr. DeSanto disagreed with the Engineer’s assertion that a lot coverage waiver is required because porous pavers are being used and shouldn’t be considered in lot coverage calculation.  Mr. Roberts agreed with that point.  Lastly, Mr. DeSanto felt an area waiver would not be necessary because the property would be properly categorized as a hotel/motel, but would ask for one if the Board deemed it necessary.

Once the applicant’s testimony was finished, Chairpeson Novak opened the hearing to questions from Board members.  Pam Kaithern verified if the applicant spoke to David Carrick, Jr. of West Cape May or David Carrick, Sr. of Cape May.  Mr. Conley stated that he spoke to him over the phone, but assumed he was the correct person because he was fully aware of the situation.  Mrs. Kaithern asked what comments were received from the Historic Preservation Commission.  Doug Carnes stated that the HPC asked about the materials being used on the outside, and a few other questions, but no one voiced any opposition.  Doris Jacobsen explained that the HPC couldn’t comment much because they were not an approved board when the permit was issued.  Mrs. Kaithern asked that the applicant try to comply with the guidelines when possible, as a courtesy.  Mrs. Kaithern asked Mr. Conley if he would consider something other than azaleas in the buffer area, something that would grow taller and create a better buffer.  He stated that deciduous trees, that would grow to about half the height of the building, were planned in the rear, and evergreens were also included to create bird habitat.  Mrs. Kaithern clarified a few points including placement of air conditioning units and how the noise will be buffered, location of a removed mulberry tree, an encroaching fence in the north-west corner of the property, use of stones in the drainage trench and whether plantings could be put on top of them that would help absorb some of the water.  She also asked what the occupancy of the tearoom is expected to be.  Mr. Carnes felt that would be determined by the fire code, but expected it to be roughly 130-140 people.  Lastly, she stated she saw part of the problem being the number of rooms and asked if the applicant had given consideration to increasing the size while reducing the number of units.  Mr. Carnes answered that he asked how many rooms he could build because anything less than 12 would not be economically feasible for him.

Chairperson Novak opened the hearing the public comment from property owners within 200 feet.

Ron Gelzunas appeared on behalf of SPE, LLC, James Labrusciano of 127 Myrtle Avenue, Mark and John Lucas of 119 Myrtle, Allen Mitchel trustee owner of 113 Myrtle, all of whom are property owners within 200 feet who object to the application.  Mr. Gelzunas objected to the fact that the applicant didn’t have the plans and documents at least 10 days prior to the hearing.  He also objected to Mr. Fik giving testimony without having any plans at the time.  He also objected to any testimony given on any of the plans that hadn’t been available to the public before the hearing.  Solicitor Russell cautioned Mr. Gelzunas that he only had one opportunity to give legal argument and if he did so at this time, he wouldn’t have a chance to later.

Mr. Gelzunas cross examined Mr. Carnes.  When asked, Mr. Carnes explained that he first became involved with the business after 200 when he worked on marketing.  He does not and has never lived on the premises.  He did not believe that any additions had been made since his family purchased the property in 1993.  He was unsure of how many special events were held at the Mansion since 1993, but believed they were done from the time they first bought it.  The average size of events is anywhere between 20 and 300 people.  He also testified that he only needs a special permit if he is going to have an outdoor wedding under a tent, and he hasn’t done 4 of those in a year since the ordinance was passed.  The events are held in the common areas which he estimated to be about 25% of the total area of the building.  Mr. Carnes could not give an estimate on the income generated from special events.  He wasn’t clear on what Mr. Gelzunas was asking.  After some clarification, Mr. Carnes asserted that 95% of his income is from room rentals.  Very little is charged for the use of the common rooms, the money is generated from room rentals – anyone holding an event has to rent all the rooms in the Mansion.  Mr. Gelzunas asked what kind of plans were submitted when the building permits were received.  Mr. Carnes submitted architectural plans when he applied for his zoning permit calling for 12 rooms, the elevator, the tearoom, public bathrooms, and stairs, etc.  Since then, the system plans, landscaping and such have changed, but the main components remain the same.  The Zoning Officer approved the plans because they were drawn within the regulations as he named them.  When asked why he had to have such a large common room for 12 rooms, Mr. Carnes explained that in order to stay in business he needs to accommodate more guests, but that rooms alone will not generate enough income to make the business profitable.  He needs to emphasize special events to boost revenue.  Mr. Gelzunas asked if any thought was given to providing parking beyond the 12 spaces on the plan.  Mr. Carnes had not.  Lastly, Mr. Gelzunas asked if he has receive any complaints about his business.  Mr. Carnes said he had only received a few complaints, but not during the special events.  When Mr. Gelzunas was finished his questioning, Mr. DeSanto had some more questions about special events.  Mr. Carnes clarified that he would not hold an event in both buildings at the same time.  He testified to how his trash and recycling is handled.

Mr. Gelzunas cross examined Lewis Conley.  He asked Mr. Conley if he could distinguish between a tourist/guesthouse or a hotel/motel.  Mr. Conley explained that it is difficult to say because the definition says it depends on the appearance, which is subjective.  Mr. Gelzunas asked what difference the way the cars are parked made to what type of building it is.  Mr. Conley testified that it makes the building look like a motel.  Mr. Gelzunas asked Mr. Conley what use the special events fit.  Mr. Conley suggested they could be similar to business meeting facilities at a hotel/motel.  In the code, meeting rooms are limited to 10% of floor area.  Both the old and new buildings appear to be over the 10% limit.  Mr. Gelzunas asked if special events were a permitted use on the premises.  Mr. Conley was unaware of anything that addressed special events, and said normal interpretation would say it’s not a permitted use, but from previous testimony, it serves as a form of advertising to bring people into the rooms.  When asked, Mr. Conley asserted that no provision had been made for additional parking needed for guests at the special events.   Mr. Gelzunas asked what purposes under land use laws would be advanced with this project.  Mr. Conley hadn’t addressed that yet because the necessity for a variance wasn’t yet determined.  When Mr. Gelzunas was finished his questioning, Mr. DeSanto asked a few questions about the appearance of the building and how it fits the definition of a hotel/motel. 

Mr. Gelzunas called James Labrusciano, 127 Myrtle Avenue, a partner in SPE LLC and adjacent property owner.  Brock Russell swore in Mr. Labrusciano.  He gave testimony on his business, which is a owner-occupied bed and breakfast that does not do any special events.  He is familiar with the events at the Wilbraham since purchasing his property seven years ago.  Mr. Labrusciano testified that he has had a few problems over that time with noise from the Wilbraham Mansion.  He testified to parking problems during events at the Wilbraham, events in the park and during dinner time from area restaurants that don’t have off-street parking.  Mr. Labrusciano was not originally opposed to the project, but became so when he realized the magnitude of the project.  He was especially concerned over the parking and special events.  Mr. Carnes had told him that he was building it without needing any variances.  Upon looking into it, he discovered that he should have gotten site plan approval before being issued a zoning permit.  Mr. Labrusciano gave a description of the surrounding properties – a mix of residential and business.  Mr. Labrusciano was surprised to hear Mr. Carnes state that he couldn’t make a profit with the new facility since his is a truly unique bed and breakfast, being the only one in Cape May that has an indoor swimming pool.  He felt if Mr. Carnes lived on the premises, he’d a have better chance of making a profit.  Mr. Labrusciano testified that the driveway being gravel would be a lot noisier for him and his guests.  Mr. DeSanto questioned Mr. Labrusciano about how long he know Doug Carnes was planning to build.  Mr. Carnes had talked to him about it since 2005, and said he was going to do the building without having to get any variances.  When asked about the number of tent weddings and how often he had problems with noise, Mr. Labrusciano was uncertain of how many outdoor wedding were held, but was sure the Borough has records on it.  The problems he had were not during the tent weddings, but usually afterward when the noise continued well after the event was over.

When Mr. Labrusciano’s testimony was concluded, Chairperson Novak asked to adjourn the meeting due to the late hour.  Brock Russell announced that the hearing would be continued to March 11th at 7 PM.

PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR: There were no comments from the public.

ADJOURNMENT:  On motion of Doris, seconded by Diane, and carried by unanimous voice vote, the meeting was adjourned at 9:55 PM.

Respectfully submitted,

Elaine L. Wallace