Monmouth Beach Residents Split Over Proposed Subdivision

1016

By John Burton
MONMOUTH BEACH – The neighbors surrounding a Jessica Place property where a subdivision has been proposed are upset and plan to take their complaints to the planning board on Oct. 27.
“Wouldn’t you be?” said Vincent Karakashian, a Seaview Avenue homeowner, about the proposal to subdivide the property for two buildable lots.
“It isn’t one or two neighbors,” who are opposed to it, insisted Faith Tieri, who owns a home on the corner of Riverdale Avenue and Jessica. “The whole entire area is opposing it.”
John Tatulli, a Shrewsbury lawyer representing the property owners, said of what his clients are seeking, “This is a routine, very small, basic subdivision.”
As to the objections raised by area residents, Tatulli countered by charging NIMBY-ism (“Not in My Back Yard.”) “They don’t want anything there,” said Tatulli. “But you can’t not have anything there,” and something will eventually be built, he said.
Jim and Caroline Chapman, who own 5 Jessica Place but don’t currently live in the home on the property, applied to the borough planning board seeking approval to subdivide the property into two buildable lots that are approximately 9,000 square feet and about 9,300 square feet. The property owners are seeking a variance for relief for an insufficient width for one of the lots. They plan to sell the property, contingent on board approval, to a developer, PJB Builders, Oceanport, which will construct two new homes, according to Tatulli.
The existing home Tatulli said, is “a broken down, dilapidated house, especially on the inside,” which had been damaged by Super Storm Sandy three years ago and will be demolished.
To renovate the existing home would cost between $300,000-$500,000. “That’s why it doesn’t make sense to try to sell it,” Tatulli maintained. “It makes more sense to just knock it down,” and have new construction.
The property owners have appeared before the planning board in August, when Tatulli presented the plans. In September the board was scheduled to continue the hearing, allowing the public to comment and many of the objecting residents were in attendance. However, due to a lack of a quorum, the meeting was adjourned until Oct. 27. That aggravated neighbors – some of whom who own property but don’t live there full time and traveled specifically to attend.
“It just amazes me how the whole board is run,” said Marjorie Jonasson, who lives in the neighborhood and has been upset about how the local board is proceeding. “It’s like a circus. It’s an embarrassment, it really is.”
“They sit there like dunces and rubberstamp,” proposals, said an equally frustrated Karakashian.
For neighbors the concern is, “First of all, that is a low lying area,” said Karakashian, insisting the area is prone to flooding due to a high water table and that will be compounded by constructing an additional home on the site. “Anytime you put up another foundation that’s all the more water that has to be displaced,” he said. “Where is it going to go?”
“I’ve had constant standing water,” Jonasson said of her neighboring property, with the water running about 20 feet long and 1 1⁄2 feet wide much of the time. “There really is a drainage problem there.”
Another concern for Jonasson is the narrowness of the existing street; putting another home will only make it more difficult for traffic and especially for emergency vehicles, she feared.
Tieri lives in northern New Jersey and plans to retire to her Monmouth Beach home in a couple of years. She too believes, “this property has water all the time.” But more troubling is the trend she’s seen here in recent years. “This is not Sea Bright. This is not Belmar. This is not Seaside Heights” where homes have been built very close to each other, impacting quality of life, she argued. “In Sea Bright you can open the window and reach over and slap your neighbor. I don’t want to live that way,” she said. “This is Monmouth Beach, considered the jewel of the shore.”
The neighbors seem to be in agreement, in that they hoped the owners would either renovate the existing home – “There’s nothing wrong with the house that’s there now,” Karakashian insisted – or build a single-family home on lot.
“It they don’t want this house,” said Tieri about the current one, “if they want a new house, fine. But build it with the restrictions,” currently in place, Tieri said.
“They have the right to build there and what we’re asking for in relief from the board is not unreasonable or out of the question,” Tatulli argued. What is being proposed is in keeping with the current zoning and the lots that will be established are larger than some that are currently in the zone, Tatulli said. And this project, he continued, would improve the neighborhood, increasing property values and is more in keeping with the area than other alternatives. Tatulli said given the size of the lot, someone could come in and build a massive “McMansion,” which would certainly be out of character for the neighborhood – and do it without seeking any variances, he noted.