Skip to content

August 17, 2020 Planning Board Meting


  1. Guest wrote:

    I thought the applicant was rude to Mr Lomas. Almost as if Mr Lomas was an impediment. The applicant objected that his line of questioning had nothing to do with the application at hand. Did he not think that his questioning had everything to do with the impact on his life? The least he could do would have been to politely entertain his questions before he went off and made tons of money. But he couldn’t even do that. I think this whole meeting was a disgrace. Spot zoning at its finest. And the nerve to say that code enforcement would be the check and balance that all the agreed upon conditions of the applications were upheld. How has that been going with respect to all the DJais additions made through the years to their outdoor area that were never approved.

    Thursday, August 20, 2020 at 1:31 am | Permalink
  2. Guest wrote:

    1 – Please leave D’jais out of this …. they are their own code enforcement.

    Thursday, August 20, 2020 at 7:08 am | Permalink
  3. Anonymous wrote:

    Another application where there is significant objections from residents that fall on deaf ears.

    Thursday, August 20, 2020 at 7:45 am | Permalink
  4. Happy hour wrote:

    Djais is untouchable just ask the mayor or Frank.

    Thursday, August 20, 2020 at 8:43 am | Permalink
  5. DAZ wrote:

    The DAZ or Djais Autonomous Zone is untouchable. All authorities with the intention of enforcing the law should stay away and mind their own business.

    Thursday, August 20, 2020 at 11:39 am | Permalink
  6. Resident wrote:

    #4. Frank who? Frank Sementa or do nothing, overpaid Frank Cinelli?

    Thursday, August 20, 2020 at 11:51 am | Permalink
  7. Anonymous wrote:

    #6 great question

    Thursday, August 20, 2020 at 1:34 pm | Permalink
  8. South Side wrote:

    Yes, they were rude and impatient with Mr. Lomas. He was fighting to retain the value of his property and the quality of life for his family.
    Start listening at 3 hours, 30 minutes, 30 seconds, where Mr. Lomas states that the mayor told him that the project was going to go through whether he liked it or not. Gee, how did the mayor know what the decision would be?

    Thursday, August 20, 2020 at 3:35 pm | Permalink
  9. watchman wrote:

    Sounds like the rat Doherty under another name, like in “Salt will never open”…I am discouraged and have concluded that all politicians suck, something I have known deep down. Want to know who will reign in hell? Politicians. (I don’t believe in hell, by the way, but there should be a separate planet for such characters, them only, to deal with each other.)

    Thursday, August 20, 2020 at 10:08 pm | Permalink
  10. 13th Avenue wrote:

    Mr. Lomas was not treated rudely at all. He was throwing darts with a blindfold on. Many of his “questions” were simply not relevant to the matter at hand, or had been addressed in the Redevelopment Agreement. He simply doesn’t want the building there, despite the fact they gave him multiple concessions over the past year and a half. Mr. Lomas bought a home next to an undeveloped/abandoned lot. What did he think was going to happen at some point? He is like the people who buy next to an airport, then complain about the noise.

    Friday, August 21, 2020 at 9:21 am | Permalink
  11. Eugene R Creamer wrote:

    To those that may be interested in my questions regarding the proposed elimination of a SIGHT TRIANGLE at the intersection of Main Street & Ninth Avenue … below is a copy of Belmar’s Development Code for corner lots.
    Belmar town fathers knew that sight triangles were necessary for safe street intersections … and the diagonal parking on 9th would have motorists blindly backing into traffic … ala Jersey Mikes.

    Chapter 40 Article 7.5
    Sight Triangle at Intersections.

    Unless more stringent regulations are provided by other provisions of this chapter, at the intersection of two or more streets, no hedge, fence, screening strip or wall higher than 30 inches above curb level, nor any obstruction to vision, other than a post not exceeding one foot in diameter, shall be permitted on any lot within the triangular area formed by two intersecting street lines bounding said lot, or the projection of such lines, and by a line connecting a point, on each line located 25 feet from the intersection of the street lines.

    Friday, August 21, 2020 at 11:58 am | Permalink
  12. South Side wrote:

    #10 13TH AVENUE
    He could expect that something might be built there according to current zoning rules. He could not foresee that the Borough would write a new set of rules to conform with what a developer wants to build.

    Friday, August 21, 2020 at 2:19 pm | Permalink
  13. Guest wrote:

    #12 – totally agree. And that is why I will not vote for an incumbent that Is currently mayor and council. I’ve drawn a chalk line as of tonight. If your sitting on the Dias right now, I will not vote for you. That starts this fall with Brennan. Who’s with me?

    Friday, August 21, 2020 at 10:33 pm | Permalink
  14. Guest wrote:

    13 – Agree

    Saturday, August 22, 2020 at 6:25 am | Permalink
  15. Average Joe wrote:

    #13 I’m an average guy who is with you in an above average way

    Thursday, August 27, 2020 at 8:11 am | Permalink
  16. Brett Lomas wrote:

    #8 Yes, this decision was made long ago by Walsifer, Kirshenbaum, McKracken, Wann, and Carvelli in concert with the developer (Taylor Family and Matrix). Nothing I said that night was going to make any sort of difference. The ‘fix’ was in when the council approved the redevelopment plan written by the developer that was tailor suited to the building they wanted to build (30 units, 4 stories).

    The ‘concessions’ that were supposedly made were vapor. Moving the setback from 30ft to 40 was necessary to have a driving lane in the parking lot. You can’t fit a parking spot and driving lane in 30ft, you need 40. Hardly a concession.

    I attended the previous meeting about the lots on 7th and listened to the planning board question and debate garbage cans, parking, traffic flow, and drainage for hours. I expected them to have the same concern for this property, not tell me that those things aren’t their concern. I expected to have community input on a redevelopment plan that is supposed to benefit the community. I expected a building in line with what was built on 5th or 8th. And what I expected was a fair process that took resident concerns seriously.

    #13-15 I’m with you. This crew needs to go. But that won’t be enough. I think we need non-partisan elections. I think we need an ordinance requiring community input on redevelopment plans since they re-write zoning laws. I think we need to not only re-examine the current zoning laws and master plan, but more importantly to actually enforce and listen to them! We need council to be transparent in their decisions and listen to the community instead of ignoring and brushing them off.

    Friday, August 28, 2020 at 5:59 pm | Permalink
  17. Yep – unfortunately, Belmar politics hasn’t changed over the past decade or so. Really missing Kenny.

    Saturday, August 29, 2020 at 11:58 am | Permalink
  18. Sandra Caputo wrote:

    16. Brett Lomas – You are right. This was already decided and nothing anyone said was going to change their plans.

    Sunday, August 30, 2020 at 7:49 am | Permalink

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.