Okay, we're public.
Okay. Good morning, everyone. My name is Frank DiCicco. I'm the chair of the Zoning Board of
Adjustment. We have a quorum. I'm officially calling this session to order. In attendance
is our vice chair, Ms. Carol Tenere, our board secretary, Mr. Confessor Plaza, and our board
member, Mr. Thomas Holloman. In addition, our legal counsel, Sharon Saleta, is joining in
today's hearings. As you know, today's the first day. We're doing this virtually, so
we'll ask everyone for your patience. Bear with us. There's a lot of work that went behind getting
this day in order, and we can't thank staff, our legal counsel, and the other members of the
Planning Commission for your hard work to get us here today. As you're probably aware, and I just
mentioned that, so I'm ad-libbing a little bit of this. While we may have to make adjustments along
the way, our plan is to call each case and basically proceed as we would have in a live
hearing. We ask that attorneys for applicants or other interested parties identify themselves for
the record, please spell your name for the stenographer, when the case you will be participating
in is called. We will then hear the appellant's presentation, followed by any presentation by
attorneys representing other parties. Interested parties and members of the public not represented
by counsel will then be given a three-minute opportunity to testify. We will finally hear
the recommendation of the Planning Commission. At the hearing's conclusion, the board will either
vote the matter immediately or hold it for discussion in executive session. Any case held
in discussion will be voted on the record at the scheduled July 21st morning session.
A couple of changes related to the virtual format. First, we will be administering oaths
to individual participants prior to their testimony rather than to the room as a whole,
obviously because we don't have a room second for the benefit of anyone participating by phone
we ask that attorneys and witnesses identify themselves prior to speaking or testifying
third we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded
and that by participating you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded
i just want to also recognize we have our board member board members uh tanya sunkett and her
staff and representing the planning commission is um paula brumbello uh is representing the
planning commission with that said we can begin but before calling our first case we'd like to
announce that the following matters listed on today's agenda are being continued. 7158
Toursdale Avenue, calendar number 37545, calendar number 39231, 106 Sparks Street,
3114 by Berry Road, calendar number 384447 are being continued and the participants or the
interested parties will be notified by the Zoning Board staff, by the Board Administrator on the day
on which those cases will have been rescheduled to. And if I missed anything, would Sharon or
Tanya, please weigh in at this time.
Sounds good
to me.
We're ready?
Please call the first case.
Calendar number 39232.
The address is 1027
North Front Street.
The attorney is Adam Laver.
Can you hear me?
Good morning.
Good morning.
Good morning, Adam.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Adam, can you hear us?
Yes, I can hear you now.
I apologize.
Technical difficulties.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, Mrs. Tenere, I do.
Thank you. Can you put your name and address on the record?
Yes. Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Adam Laver of Blank Room, 1 Logan Square, on behalf of 1025 North Front Street, LP.
on behalf of 1025 North Front Street, L.P.
Please proceed, Mr. Laver, with your testimony.
Mr. Laver, I'm sorry, you said 1025?
Yes, 1025 North Front Street, L.P.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
That goes through to 31, right?
Yes, it does, Mrs. Tanarin.
It's very good to see everyone in these difficult times.
Thank you to the staff, the professional team, for making this happen.
I'll proceed at this point.
I've shared with Council for the Zoning Board,
and hopefully all members of the Board have an exhibit package with Exhibits 1 through 12.
The 8,500 approximately square foot unimproved subject property is located in the shadow of I-95 with frontage along both Front and Allen Streets. The parcel is owned CMX3.
The proposal before you, members of the board, which to my knowledge has extensive 100% support
from all parties, is to stripe this otherwise practically unusable parcel for off-site parking
for the Fillmore Theater to accommodate 16 cars with access off of Front Street.
You can see the proposed site plan at Tab 12. The project has been reviewed by Councilman Mark
Squilla, is unanimously supported by the Fishtown Neighbors Association. The community meeting with
FNA preceded the stay-at-home orders and was an in-person meeting with numerous neighbors. You
can see that support at Tab 5. This is not a variance case. It is a referral case. You can
see at tab nine the referral the use requires special exception review the proposed use members
of the board is in keeping with goals previously discussed with the community surrounding the
development of the Fillmore to accommodate parking needs at appropriate locations surrounding the
venue this particular spot as you'll see in the photographs is truly unsuitable for very much
unfortunately, due to the shadows cast by I-95 and the nature of the infrastructure surrounding
it. And that, I would submit to you, is why we have the support of FNA. In this instance,
this will provide needed parking, upgraded landscaping and lighting, as noted in the RCO
support letter. The proposal fits into the surrounding neighborhood as evidenced by the
extensive support, and this all speaks to the granting of relief being of benefit to the public
and within the spirit of the zoning code. Amanda Bennett, on behalf of the ownership, is here today
to answer the board's questions and, if given the opportunity, to adopt and affirm the testimony
that I've offered as her own. At this point, I'll pause in case the members of the board have any
question I should note one additional piece of information that some months
ago we had come before you the same ownership for a case at 25 Richmond
Street the same type of issue same type of support and we were pleased in that
instance that the board granted that referral as well thank you any questions
from the board. Is there anyone else who wishes to testify on this matter?
Okay, please raise their hand.
As I mentioned, if the board wishes, Amanda Bennett is available to adopt and affirm at
the appropriate time. Do we need to have that, Amanda?
all right yes for the record if she can do that that would be helpful
okay amanda please yes i i good uh would you please state your name and address for the record
amanda amanda bennett b-e-n-n-e-t-t 319 portsmouth p-o-r-t-s-m-o-u-t-h road cherry hill
New Jersey 08. Thank you. And you're here on behalf of the owner of the subject property,
is that correct? You're here on behalf of the owner of the property, correct? Correct. Thank
you. And were you able to hear the testimony, Ms. Bennett, that I offered today? Yes. Would
yes would you adopt and affirm that as your own yes thank you miss better
you adopt and affirm that as your own? Yes.
thank you miss bennett um questions from the board anyone else wish to testify planning commission
we have no objection to the granting of the variance at this location or special exception
thank you calendar number 39232 1025-31 north front street my vote is yes
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes good luck thank you thank you mr labor thank you
members of the board uh i hope everyone stay as well stay safe everyone thank you thank you
next calendar number three seven nine four eight thirteen twenty eight south 9th street
this case is a reconsideration I believe the attorney for this case is
Stephanie Boggs it says yes Claire Harrison and yes the attorney is Stephanie
Boggs good morning Stephanie good morning how are you well we received
notice for this hearing that it was scheduled for next Tuesday on the 21st
of July at 930 so our posting was submitted in connection with that date
as you said it's just simply a reconsideration of the vote a limited
hearing particularly to consider the most recent letter that was submitted
by Passing Square Civic Association
Karen will nothing seems that doesn't appear that anything will change if but are we bound to pull
this next week since that's what the notice indicated my only concern is because this is
a reconsideration is there a representative of the RCO that requested the reconsideration here
anyone here from peshunk square yes i think to go forward they would have to
have someone here someone is here from peshunk i believe suzanne is on the call
um and she is able to be unmuted i think she is logged into this call suzanne tavani
Tavani. Suzanne, good morning. It's Suzanne Tavani for the Passion Square Civic Association.
Suzanne, before you begin, just please spell your name for the stenographer.
Sure. Tavani is T-A-V-A-N-I. First name is Suzanne, S-U-Z-A-N-N-E.
And do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
yes I do thank you so because of the note do you have any problem with us
having a reconsideration hearing today well I don't have a problem I'm ready
for today because I saw on the notice that was sent out with all the dates of
all the cases that today was our date I made my my time I'm not at work I other
people have made time to participate and um just hope that you know we should be we should have
this consideration so were there others on this call who uh from passing square beside yourself
i believe angel dippolito was on or will try to be on and john de julia sarah anton i think
has all also been on but i'm not too sure if they're if they stayed on or they've jumped off
i'm not too sure but i i am here and i'm ready to present our our case uh maybe what we could do
and i guess this is a question for uh sharon and tanya uh we can proceed uh with the today's
hearing and maybe hold a week before we vote it just in case someone raises the issue about the
notification not being as accurate as it should have been because some people may think it's next
week as opposed to today. Does that make sense? Stephanie, are you prepared to go forward?
Stephanie, are you prepared to go forward?
No, we were prepared to present next week in accordance with the notice that was circulated.
So as I said, it's a limited scope of this hearing, and we welcome the participation of the RCO.
But the notice and the posting were both scheduled for next week.
So if the board chooses to proceed, we can certainly honor that.
But we were intending to present this hearing and address their concerns at next week's meeting.
If we were to split the hearing into two parts, could we take the testimony of the
representatives of the RCO who are here today?
Would you object to that, Stephanie?
How long does it take to get in?
Hello?
Suzanne?
that's john julia john de julius attempting to speak yes i mean i'm not sure i understand
exactly what's going on it said something about the posting and that's why they're not ready to
proceed because the posting was not correct or there was some failure in posting with notice
but the notice that we received from the zoning board scheduled the hearing for july 21st at 9 30
am and everybody else received one that said it was today I don't I don't know
how that probably about two weeks on both the front and back wall you know as
far as the actual posting and we communicated you know with Suzanne she
sent the information out and we went back and forth on it so it's been out
there for a couple weeks, I think. We've also been in communication with Suzanne, including sending
her the notice that we received from the zoning board. You know, if possible, we would request
that this can be heard next week, so as not to prejudice our client, who was prepared to present
in accordance with the notice we received from the zoning board. This is like, this is like
attempt number five or six, between the zoning, between the DBA, and the meetings that we had
locally john john that's not unusual i mean
there are some revisions that's how you got to the revisions because there's
been interaction between the rco and the applicant
uh again today's our first day that we're doing this virtually
uh we expected there will be some issues but we're trying to get cases that have
been sitting on the docket for the last four months
as a result result of the code so we ask everyone to
the understanding of the situation that we're in what we're trying to find out
is if we can proceed today hold off on any vote apparently it sounds like the
RCO is ready but not being disrespectful but the attorney for the applicant is
concerned I think that because the notification said the 21st you wouldn't
want something to come up later on and say you had a hearing on a day that it
wasn't posted but something to that mr. chairman I would support splitting it in
two because I have neighbors here who have made the time I will make the time
next week to to jump on again but this has been going on for quite some time as
you know we weren't advised of the July the January 8th hearing which is not
lost on us uh so we're a little bit you know taken aback but i'm i'm ready to proceed now
and i will present my testimony and i will jump back on next week when uh the applicant's law firm
is um able to do so also today we'll just be taking testimony sharon is that you suggested
splitting into does that make sense um it does stephanie do you object to
that that the yes yes i do we would like the
ability to respond in real time to their concerns
and to their comments and because of the posting date that was originally sent
out we are not prepared to do that today
so in accordance with the date that was sent out on the poster and the notice
that we received from the zoning board we would request that all testimony can
be heard next week and we have the opportunity to respond
at that hearing. I think, given the objection, it will have to be continued.
Question for Tanya. Will we be able to have this on the calendar for next week? Is there
anything that would prevent us from doing that? No. We can hear whatever you wish. Okay. All right.
Just want to make sure. Thank you. Suzanne, unfortunately, and John, we appreciate,
and whoever else is on the call but the notice was for the 21st and we have to adhere to that