Meeting record
Zoning Board of Adjustment, April 9, 2026
- Body
- Zoning Board of Adjustment
- Date
- April 9, 2026 (regular meeting)
- Video
- city recording, 2h 55m
- Called to order
- 0:02:07
- Adjourned
- 2:55:26
- Agenda
- data.jerseycitynj.gov
- Memorialized resolutions
- jerseycitynj-energovpub.tylerhost.net
- Votes
- 3 confirmed
The Zoning Board of Adjustment publishes no written minutes, so the votes and attendance on this page are as heard on the video and are marked unconfirmed until a memorialized resolution confirms them (see the
vote rule).
Attendance
Items
6b Z2026-0015 case
Announced under correspondence (the chair asked 'Is there any correspondence that you need to share with us?', 0:04:21) by a staff speaker who is not named: the applicant 'requested to be carried to the May 7th zoning board meeting with preservation of notice' (0:04:27). Carried to May 7, 2026, with preservation of notice. No motion or vote was heard.
6c Z2025-0023 case
Announced with 6b by the same speaker: the applicant 'also requested to be carried to the May 7th Zoning Board meeting with preservation of notice' (0:04:58). Carried to May 7, 2026, with preservation of notice. No motion or vote was heard.
6a Z2025-0094 case
A speaker who is not named asked 'What about case Z2025-0094?' (0:05:09); the staff speaker answered 'that has long been assigned to that date' (0:05:14), referring to May 7, 2026. The agenda prints it as carried to May 7, 2026 with preservation of notice. No motion or vote was heard.
9 Z2026-0021 case
6-0 6 ayes, 0 nays, roll call at 0:08:05Rests on the re-transcription of 0:08:02 to 0:08:22 (checker, 2026-10-19); the full pass missed Burns's and Patel's answers. Motion 'to approve case Z2026-0021 as presented to the Board this evening' (0:07:53) by a speaker who is not named; 'Can I get a second?' (0:08:02), no second heard. Roll call by a reader who is not named from 'Acting Vice Chair Allen' (0:08:05): Allen 'Yes' (0:08:07, p 0.96; full pass p 0.19), DiAngelo 'Yes' (0:08:10, p 0.99), Shedeed 'Yes' (0:08:12, p 0.96), Burns 'Yes' (0:08:14, p 0.95), Patel 'Yes' (0:08:16, p 0.95), Chair Coyle 'Yes' (0:08:18, p 0.99). Announced 'Motion passes 6-0' (0:08:18). Araujo, Czaplicki and Coviello were not called. RESO Z2026-0021 on EnerGov (decided April 9, 2026, memorialized May 7, 2026), vote page: 'Vote: 6-0 in favor', yes for Catherine Coyle, 'Anthony D'Angelo', John Burns, Geoffrey Allen, 'Peter Barron' and Ahmed Shedeed. The table does not list Patel, who answered on the video, and names two people not in the member list; held. The resolution (RESO Z2026-0021) records 6-0 but its vote table names 'Anthony D'Angelo' and 'Peter Barron' and does not list Commissioner Patel, heard voting yes on the video. Published as heard on Adam Hanford's review of 2026-10-20.
- 0:06:25 Attorney: The applicant's attorney asked for a one-year extension of approvals granted April 22, 2021, previously extended July 13, 2023 and August 8, 2024, which expired May 27, 2025, to May 27, 2026.
- 0:07:34 Staff: Staff asked the applicant to confirm it would abide by the conditions of the original approval and recommended approval.
Called at 0:05:28 and again at 0:06:01. The chair said no new case would start after 10 p.m. and that public comments were limited to three minutes, with Commissioner Shedeed as timekeeper (0:05:28 to 0:05:55). The chair asked 'Mr. Higgins? No' (0:06:10); the attorney introduced themself as 'Thomas Hardig on behalf of the applicant 297th Association, LLC' (0:06:25, as heard; agenda attorney: Michael Higgins, Esq.; RESO Z2026-0021: applicant Farhad Behin, represented by Thomas Hartigan, Esq.). Extension of approvals for case Z19-001 (agenda). No member of the public spoke (0:07:14).
11 Z2025-0055 case
6-0 6 ayes, 0 nays, roll call at 0:22:10Rests on the re-transcription of 0:22:06 to 0:22:28 (checker, 2026-10-19) and the announced count; the full pass heard only Allen. The chair asked for 'a motion to vote with conditions on case Z2025-0055' (0:21:43); motion 'to approve case Z2025-005 [as heard] as presented to the board this evening' (0:21:56) by a speaker who is not named; 'can I get a second?' (0:22:05), no second heard. Roll call by a reader who is not named from 'Acting Vice Chair Allen' (0:22:10): Allen 'Yes' (0:22:13, p 1.00), DiAngelo 'Yes' (0:22:16, p 1.00), Shedeed called (0:22:17) with no answer heard in either pass, Burns 'Yes' (0:22:20, p 1.00), Patel 'Yes' (0:22:21, p 0.90), Chair Coyle 'Yes' (0:22:23, p 1.00). Announced 'Motion carries 6-0' (0:22:23): five ayes heard, so Shedeed's aye is filled from the count. Araujo, Czaplicki and Coviello were not called. RESO Z2025-0055 on EnerGov (decided April 9, 2026, memorialized May 7, 2026), vote page: 'Vote: 6 in favor none opposed', yes for Coyle, Allen, Shedeed, Patel, Burns and DiAngelo. The resolution's vote table does not list Commissioners Araujo, Czaplicki or Coviello; absent as heard on the video.
- 0:08:36 Attorney: The applicant's attorney, Stephen Joseph, described a rear and fourth-floor addition to a single-family home on a 12.5 by 50 foot lot, with a rear yard setback of 8.7 feet where 15 feet is required.
- 0:10:57 Applicant: Architect Jeff Lewis described the floor plans and finishes and a height of a little less than 36 feet where 42 feet is allowed.
- 0:19:53 Staff: Staff described the rear yard variance, said conditions were in the staff memo, and recommended approval; the applicant's attorney accepted the conditions.
Called at 0:08:15 ('Z2025-0055, which is 366 5th Street'). Notices entered as Exhibit A1 (0:08:36). The applicant's planner was not present and did not testify (0:09:51, 0:18:23). Non-conforming conditions to be removed: a fence across the property line, a lot line window, a conduit and a vent (0:17:58). The attorney agreed to make the tree pit as conforming as feasible in response to a forestry letter (0:21:15). No member of the public spoke (0:19:35). Staff memo date heard as 'April 7th, 2025' (0:19:56). Staff speaker addressed as 'Matt' by the attorney (0:21:15; agenda review planner: Matt Ward).
10 Z2026-0004 case
6-1 6 ayes, 1 nay, roll call at 2:51:06Full pass only. The chair asked for 'a motion to vote to deny the appeal before us tonight' (2:50:33); motion 'to deny KZ2026-0004 [as heard] as presented to the board this evening' (2:50:55) by a speaker who is not named; 'Can I get a second?' (2:51:06), no second heard. Roll call by a reader who is not named from 'Acting Vice Chair Allen' (2:51:06): Allen 'Deny' (p 0.98), then, after a speaker asked whether that meant voting for the denial, 'So yes ... Oh yes' (2:51:06); DiAngelo 'Denied. Yes.' (2:51:28, p 0.95 and 0.92), then a speaker who is not named said 'The motion is to deny the appeal. So it's either yes or no' and 'So you're a yes', answered 'Yes' (p 0.57); Shedeed 'Yes' (2:51:50, p 0.70); Coviello 'Yes' (2:51:50, p 1.00); Burns 'Yes' (2:51:50, p 1.00); Patel 'I would say no' (2:51:59, 'no' p 0.97); Chair Coyle 'Yes' (2:51:59, p 1.00). Announced 'Motion carries six to one' (2:52:06), which agrees with the answers heard. Coviello was not called in the opening roll call or in the two earlier roll calls and no arrival was announced; whether Coviello heard the whole case is held for Adam (EDITORIAL.md §4, eligibility). Araujo and Czaplicki were not called. RESO Z2026-0004 on EnerGov (date of hearing April 9, 2026, memorialized June 4, 2026), vote table: 'VOTE ON MOTION TO DENY THE APPEAL PASSES ... VOTE 6-1', yes for Coyle, Allen, Shedeed, Burns, Coviello and DiAngelo, no for Patel; it does not list Araujo or Czaplicki, absent as heard. Its recital says the motion 'was seconded and then carried by a unanimous vote'. The resolution's recital says the motion 'carried by a unanimous vote'; its own vote table and the video give 6-1 with Commissioner Patel voting no. Commissioner Coviello is first heard at this roll call; recorded aye as heard. Published as heard on Adam Hanford's review of 2026-10-20.
- 0:27:19 Attorney: The applicant's attorney, Jennifer Berardo, said the property is neither in a historic district nor a landmark and appealed the Historic Preservation Officer's and Commission's determinations and the zoning officer's denial of the demolition permit.
- 0:31:07 Applicant: Historic preservation consultant Peter Primavera testified that 26 changes to the primary facade since the 1935 and 1974 tax photographs left the building without integrity under section 345-30E1.
- 2:32:30 Staff: The historic preservation officer, who is not named, described the review of the demolition application and the Historic Preservation Commission's 7-2 vote recommending denial of the permit.
- 2:40:13 Attorney: The applicant's attorney gave a summation and asked that the zoning officer's determination be overturned.
- 2:49:04 Attorney: The board attorney, asked by the chair to frame the vote, said upholding the appeal would allow the demolition and denying it would mean a demolition permit could not be issued.
Called at 0:22:26 ('Z2026-0004 ... 32 Sherman Place'). Notices confirmed on the portal (0:25:03). A speaker who is not named, who also swore the witness, said the board could not rule on the legality of the demolition ordinance, which was challenged in a different case (0:25:13). Recited dates: demolition request May 22, 2025; Historic Preservation Officer's determination of significance August 29, 2025; Historic Preservation Commission hearing December 15 (0:27:55 to 0:28:39). Exhibits marked A1 (consultant's report, 0:36:24), A2 (presentation, 0:38:39), A3 to A5 (Hunter Research 2022 survey tables 4.3, 4.1 and 4.5, 1:18:42) and A6 (2024 historic preservation element, 1:21:10). The chair called a recess at 1:51:51 ('we'll come back in ten minutes'); the meeting reconvened at 2:03:52. Public portion opened 2:03:52 and closed at 2:29:50; nine members of the public were sworn and spoke. A speaker who is not named asked whether anyone had objected to the earlier alterations (2:30:06); the applicant's attorney said the owner bought the property in 1987 as it looks today (2:30:36). The chair announced 'The bill is denied' [as heard] (2:51:59).
12.1 Z2024-0063 case
Voice vote, no roll call at 2:54:21No member's answer is recorded for a voice vote.
Agenda item 12 (Memorialization of Resolutions); the agenda lists no individual resolutions, so 12.x is this record's order of reading. Read by a speaker who is not named as 'Z2024-0063 ... Mr. Lee, L.I. ... 100 DeKalb Avenue' (2:53:36); applicant name and address in the title from RESO Z2024-0063 p. 1 ('APPLICANT: LIK YEUNG LI', '100 DEKALB AVENUE'). Heard February 5, 2026; present as read: 'Chairwoman Ms. Araujo, Vice Chair Shedeed, Commissioners DiAngelo, Czaplicki, Burns, and Coviello'; passed six in favour, none opposed (2:54:11, 2:54:21). Of the members present tonight, Coyle, Allen and Patel are not in that list. Memorialized by voice vote: 'All in favor of memorializing that? Aye.' (2:54:21, 'Aye' p 0.93); no roll call, so no by-member vote is recorded.
12.2 Z2023-0024 case
Voice vote, no roll call at 2:54:56No member's answer is recorded for a voice vote.
Heard March 5, 2026 (2:54:21). Present as read: 'Acting Chair Araujo and then Commissioners Allen, Czaplicki, Burns, Coviello, and DiAngelo' (2:54:28); passed six in favour, none opposed (2:54:56). Of the members present tonight, Coyle, Shedeed and Patel are not in that list. Memorialized by voice vote: 'All in favor of approving that? Aye.' (2:54:56, 'Aye' p 0.94); no roll call, so no by-member vote is recorded.
12.3 Z2026-0020 case
Voice vote, no roll call at 2:55:26No member's answer is recorded for a voice vote.
Read as 'the last application that evening' (March 5, 2026; same attendance as read for 12.2) (2:54:56). Passed six in favour, none opposed (2:55:26). Memorialized by voice vote: 'All in favor of approving that? Aye.' (2:55:26, 'Aye' p 0.92); no roll call, so no by-member vote is recorded.
14 motion
Adjournment
Voice vote, no roll call at 2:55:26 as heard, unconfirmedNo member's answer is recorded for a voice vote.
'Well, I make a motion to adjourn the meeting. Can I get a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. Meeting adjourned.' (2:55:26, word timing 2:55:39 to 2:55:44), by speakers who are not named. Other agenda items: call to order 0:02:07 (the chair said the meeting would be recorded because the stenographer had an emergency); sunshine announcement 0:02:40; roll call 0:02:52 (see attendance); swearing in of staff asked at 0:03:09 (oath not heard); correspondence 0:04:21. Items 7 (Old Business), 8 (New Business) and 13 (Executive Session) were not called on the video.
Record drafted 2026-10-19, checked 2026-10-19, reviewed by Adam Hanford (review pending).