Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Setback Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board grants setback variance for newly installed pool at 112 12th Street; neighbors urged stricter surveying
Summary
The board granted a variance to allow a fiberglass pool at 112 12th Street to remain where one corner sits 7.2 feet from the rear property line instead of the required 8 feet. The pool contractor characterized the encroachment as an honest mistake and neighbors urged stricter on‑site surveying and enforcement.
The Beach Haven Land Use Board approved a setback variance for a newly installed fiberglass pool at 112 12th Street after hearing testimony from the pool contractor and the owner, and receiving multiple public objections about surveying and construction oversight.
Attorney James Raven described the application on behalf of Hansen Realty LLC as relief only for the portion of the pool that encroaches into the required 8‑foot rear setback. Pool contractor Brian Gomez of New Wave Pools, sworn before the board, said site conditions (frozen ground, debris) and reliance on stake ribbons led to an honest placement error. "I completely thought I had it within its setbacks… I was 0.8 of a foot off," Gomez said.
Owner William Hanssen (on Zoom) said he received a temporary and then a final certificate of occupancy despite the discrepancy and that the as‑built survey (revision dated 05/19/2025) revealed the setback issue late in construction. Gomez told the board moving the pool would require removing pavers and concrete, heavy equipment and considerable expense.
Neighbors Owen Beemens and Mike Shaltry urged the board to hold the applicant and contractors accountable, stressing modern surveying techniques and asking the board to verify other potential noncompliance (for example, impervious coverage). Beemens said, "Pool builders are measured twice and dig once. It's totally unacceptable to put the pool on the wrong spot."
Board counsel and members noted the board's role is to decide the variance request before it, not to substitute other enforcement processes; if additional zoning nonconformities exist the owner may need to apply separately or face enforcement. The board approved the single setback variance by a 6–3 vote after members weighed the minimal extent of the encroachment (about 0.8 foot) against the disruption and cost of removing the finished pool.
The approval was limited to the setback variance for the pool; the chair and counsel emphasized that any other zoning compliance issues, if discovered, would be considered separately.
