Hearing goes 4 hours over Somers Point Paddle Club; planners approve it
SOMERS POINT — A hearing on a trio of applications before the Planning Board on Feb. 19 started almost 25 minutes late due to an issue with notification of neighbors and dragged on for nearly four hours before each was approved unanimously.
At the outset, residents of the 14-unit 1800 building of Harbour Cove Condominiums North claimed they did not receive a certified letter advertising the hearing.
Attorney Chris Baylinson of Cape May Court House represented Jim Leeds, Thomas Wingate and unnamed others who complained of not knowing about the project to allow for a mix of commercial and residential uses on the properties bordered by Bay, Maryland and Pleasant avenues.
The project involves a change to the previously approved application for the Somers Point Paddle Club — a private swimming club with a bar and restaurant — single and multifamily housing and continuation of boat yard operations, which was the cause of much of the discontent.
Attorney Peter Flannery, representing the developer, argued that notifications were sent to every property within the required mailing zone, fulfilling the state statute.
Baylinson said the applications involved two major site plans, two subdivisions and a minor site plan, arguing that his clients deserved the right to inspect the documents prior to the meeting.
“The procedure failed these guys,” he said, requesting a postponement until the March meeting.
Flannery argued that Baylinson’s clients were present and represented by counsel, again noting his team had fulfilled all requirements.
Board solicitor Joel Fleishman said the board was permitted to meet in closed session to discuss procedural matters. The board convened in the mayor’s office to confer and, upon returning, voted unanimously to proceed more than 45 minutes after the scheduled start as the room heated up.
Wingate expressed “dismay” that he was not notified, saying he considered one of the Scarborough brothers “a friend and neighbor” and was surprised by the “lack of community outreach.”
He said there is no document outlining where boats will be stored at the boat yard nor how many are permitted, saying if it were a parking lot everything would have to be delineated.
Wingate also complained that since the operations were being shrunken to just one portion of the overall project site, there would be more density of vessels and equipment.
He questioned stormwater management, flooding mitigation measures and the use of shipping containers for storage, saying the site is unsightly. He also questioned whether the soil is contaminated and complained of a “putrid fish smell” from the dumpsters, which are apparently used by fishers to dump their refuse.
“It’s not a pleasant place behind residential properties,” Wingate said of the boat yard. “I don’t support an industrial shipyard.”
Another neighbor brought up traffic, parking and trash.
“You have to consider how this affects those who live there. You’re cramming too much into a little area,” she told the board. “I am really disappointed that we were not kept in the loop.”
Baylinson said even though a portion of the overall project was approved, the board was hearing a new application not an amended one. That, he said, requires explanation of the entire plan.
Leeds, one of Baylinson’s clients, said he was not notified.
“These proceedings are a disgrace,” he said.
Baylinson than proceeded to grill Flannery and project engineer Jason Sciullo for hours on multiple aspects of the project, from trash storage to parking.
Flannery stated operation of the boat yard was “continuation of a long-standing use” and required no variances.
Leeds also questioned blockage of a main road alongside the boat yard, saying it would be difficult for fire apparatus to get there in case of emergency. He questioned whether equipment would be kept on the site, noting a flatbed truck, barges and other vessels there.
Wingate said the boat yard has “turned into an industrial nightmare in our back yard,” asking for a trash enclosure to hide the equipment and debris. He also objected to the use of shipping containers, saying they are an eyesore.
Baylinson pleaded that the developer “make what’s going to be outside their front door nice.”
Planning Board Chairman Paul Striefsky asked Flannery what his client could do to improve the aesthetics.
Sciullo said the shipping containers would be behind a 6-foot vinyl fence and an office trailer would be removed. He also noted that boats can be stored in the lot up against the condominium building but they have chosen not to do so out of courtesy.
Mayor Dennis Tapp asked if there were any way the shipping containers could be masked to make the site more attractive.
The developer agreed to erect trellises over the shipping containers to block them from sight, not to block the center drive lane with boats and to move trash to the storage building alongside the Paddle Club.
– By CRAIG D. SCHENCK/Sentinel staff