Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Site Plan Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board approves second‑floor balcony extension at 527 Bangs Avenue with conditions
Summary
The Asbury Park Planning Board approved an amendment to previously granted approvals for 527 Bangs Avenue to extend second‑floor rear balconies from 5 feet 4 inches to 7 feet 8 inches, subject to corrected plan dates, confirmation that garage ventilation is unaffected, and compliance with outstanding prior conditions.
The Asbury Park Planning Board on May 5 approved a limited amendment for 527 Bangs Avenue permitting a second‑floor rear balcony extension from the previously approved 5 feet 4 inches to a 7 feet 8 inches railing projection, with conditions requiring corrected plan dates and confirmation that the change does not affect garage ventilation or outstanding prior approval conditions.
Andrew Carris, counsel for Pearl Bud Realty LLC, described the amendment as a narrow modification to previously approved plans for a mixed‑use building. Architect David Businelli testified about dimensions: “The balcony itself is 7 foot 8 from the outside face of the rear exterior wall to the rails, and then 1 foot 8 from the railing to the edge of the roof,” he said, describing the revised deck projection.
Board members asked for clarification about an existing opening above the garage and whether enclosing or extending the roof affects garage ventilation. The board required that plans be re‑dated and that any outstanding conditions of prior approvals remain in force. The motion to approve included a condition that the record reflect the amendment’s limited scope and that the applicant correct the submission dates on the plans.
On roll call the board approved the amendment: Councilwoman Yvonne Clayton (yes), Jim Henry (abstain), Mayor John Moore (yes), Jen Sowder (yes), Daniel Shenamayo (yes), Catherine McLaughlin (yes), Michael Goonan (yes) and Chairwoman Barbara Kurzak (yes). The board recorded the abstention and noted that other façade and plan inconsistencies remain subject to city review and outstanding conditions of prior approvals.
The planning board’s approval is limited to the balcony extension as described; any further design, façade or site‑plan changes remain subject to the board’s review and the developer’s compliance with prior conditions.
