No retraction of DeFusco's fallacious Facebook post "Hoboken says NO to Shake Shake!"
Instead, the Architect goes under the bus on Twitter! It's all his fault!
|Stealing hearts and hamburgers in the Mile Square|
Busy day, folks
We start off with this quote in Jerseydigs.com's article, "So What’s Really The Deal With Hoboken And Shake Shack?"
It seems the "rumor" that Councilman Mike DeFusco has circulated on Facebook, is blowing up like curlies left in the deep fryer."A rep for Shake Shack told Jersey Digs that “We have no news to share about an opening in Hoboken” and added “as you can imagine, rumors often circulate about our potential openings.”
Recall that DeFusco not only scolded "Hoboken" for allegedly "saying NO to Shake Shake" but threatened not to re-appoint board members who had voted against the variances.
The April 18, 2017 ZBA hearing transcript for 107-111 Washington Street was posted this morning.
Based on a keyword search ("Shake Shack") of the 178-page transcript, the first time that "Shake Shack"enters the hearing is on page 21, in the testimony of the Architect:
The Architect also told me directly that the "owners were in a direct contact/contractual agreement with Shake Shack."
That may be, but why was no contract, lease, or letter of commitment provided to the board? Nor did Shake Shack appear to testify.
On Friday, April 19, 2017 Shake Shack denied even a "plan" for the site, via Twitter:
In GA's opinion, the most telling part of the transcript, with respect Shake Shack's 'role' in the Application, comes from the Applicant's attorney, Robert Matule, Esq.
Here is how Matule, introduced the application:
What happened to Shake Shack?
The complete omission of "Shake Shack" (or even "a nationally-known restaurant franchise") by the Applicant's Attorney raises some questions.
Why leave that part out?
Why pitch the Shake Shack tenancy at all with insufficient proofs for the Board to consider?
But the Councilman's decision to write a misleading post on Facebook, and all the attendant publicity, may have the unintended consequences of chasing Shake Shake permanently away from the Mile Square. Now they see what a shit-show Hoboken is .
But really, the finger-pointing, scapegoating Councilman is suggesting the ZBA zone by variance, when the power to change zoning lies with the City Council.
A reader said the same:
"May I point out that the power to zone lies with the Governing Body?
If Councilman Defusco thinks it is appropriate to allow 6 stories and 80% commercial lot coverage with no parking and remove the encouragement of accessory garages and apartments on Court Street he should discuss this with his colleagues on the Council:"
40:55D-62 Power to zone.Click here for the full ZBA hearing transcript.
49. Power to zone. a. The governing body may adopt or amend a zoning ordinance relating to the nature and extent of the uses of land and of buildings and structures thereon. Such ordinance shall be adopted after the planning board has adopted the land use plan element and the housing plan element of a master plan, and all of the provisions of such zoning ordinance or any amendment or revision thereto shall either be substantially consistent with the land use plan element and the housing plan element of the master plan or designed to effectuate such plan elements; provided that the governing body may adopt a zoning ordinance or amendment or revision thereto which in whole or part is inconsistent with or not designed to effectuate the land use plan element and the housing plan element, but only by affirmative vote of a majority of the full authorized membership of the governing body, with the reasons of the governing body for so acting set forth in a resolution and recorded in its minutes when adopting such a zoning ordinance; and provided further that, notwithstanding anything aforesaid, the governing body may adopt an interim zoning ordinance pursuant to subsection b. of section 77 of P.L.1975, c.291 (C.40:55D-90).
The zoning ordinance shall be drawn with reasonable consideration to the character of each district and its peculiar suitability for particular uses and to encourage the most appropriate use of land. The regulations in the zoning ordinance shall be uniform throughout each district for each class or kind of buildings or other structure or uses of land, including planned unit development, planned unit residential development and cluster development, but the regulations in one district may differ from those in other districts.