Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Asbury Park zoning board approves revised plan for 1206 Comstock Street with conditions
Summary
The Asbury Park Zoning Board approved variances for a revised single‑family house at 1206 Comstock Street after the applicant added a full front porch and made other changes intended to match neighborhood character; approval was unanimous and includes several conditions including removal of a proposed front fence and a street‑tree contribution.
The Asbury Park Zoning Board of Adjustment on Dec. 10 approved a revised plan for 1206 Comstock Street, granting relief for a front‑yard setback of 11 feet and increased building coverage after the applicant redesign reduced prior design exceptions and added a five‑foot full‑length front porch.
Board members said the revised elevations respond to concerns raised at an earlier hearing and praised the applicant for making quick changes. "I think the applicant listened very, very well to the concerns of the board," board planner John Taikina testified during his planning opinion, recommending the variances as C‑variances consistent with neighborhood character.
The board’s approval carried conditions laid out during deliberations: wheel stops at the end of the ribbon driveway, a 5‑by‑5‑foot concrete pad at the side entrance, revision of the light fixture note to show two sconce locations, applicant outreach to JCP&L to explore relocating or minimizing an overhead service line, and payment of the ordinance‑required street‑tree contribution. Board counsel also said the applicant would represent to the client that the front fence be removed from the application after multiple board members said a front fence would make the house appear closed off.
The application record shows the driveway was extended to terminate seven feet from the eastern property line to permit two tandem parking spaces; the proposed lot coverage was revised in submissions and discussed by the engineer. During testimony, engineer John Boletta described a fence plan that mixes four‑foot open picket and six‑foot solid vinyl segments; the board indicated the gate and certain fence pieces would be revisited if the applicant returns for any future fence request.
Neighbors who commented included Spencer Pelas (1018 Fifth Avenue), who said the increased setback and drainage revisions were improvements but raised privacy concerns about a two‑and‑a‑half‑story house sited near his yard. Heather Fowler, another nearby resident, said the revised design is more in keeping with the block and supported the idea of a low open picket rather than a solid vinyl front fence.
The vote to approve the application, subject to the conditions above and compliance with outstanding board professional reports, was recorded in roll call as affirmative from all eligible members present. The board advised the applicant to submit any remaining paperwork and comply with the conditions before permits are finalized.
The board’s approval resolves a continued application that had been carried after an earlier hearing; the applicant confirmed revised plans were last updated 11/06/2024 and that the planner’s letter dated 11/21/2024 informed several of the required clarifications.
