Plenary retail consumption license OK’d by council
HAMMONTON—The Eagle Theatre was granted a plenary retail consumption liquor license at the November 21 meeting of town council.
During the meeting, council held a public hearing on the issuance of a new license with the theater exception.
The Eagle Theatre was not named as the applicant for the license on the town council agenda released by the town of Hammonton on November 18.
“‘Public Hearing on the Issuance of New Plenary Retail Consumption Liquor Licenses with the Theater Exception - Pursuant to N.J.S. 33:1-19.8’, in the Town of Hammonton, Atlantic County, per the requirements of N.J.S. 33-1-19.1 and N.J.S. 33:1-19.2,” the agenda item read.
Mayor Stephen DiDonato said during the meeting that the applicant was The Eagle Theatre.
“This is for The Eagle Theatre. This is allowing the theater to serve liquor prior to and after a show for a very limited period of time, and during the show,” DiDonato said.
Councilman Edward Wuillermin made a motion to open the license application for a public hearing, which Councilman William Olivo seconded.
No one from the public spoke on the matter. Wuillermin made a motion to close the public portion and adopt and publish the approval of the license, which Olivo seconded. The application was approved unanimously.
In other business, during the meeting, several change orders were entertained by council.
Among them was Resolution No. 163-2022, Approve Change to Cost of Tree Removal for the Redevelopment Agreement.
This references Resolution 154-2022, passed on October 21, which regarded “tree removal for a cost not to exceed $7,500 for the Redevelopment Agreement for the proposed project within a portion of the area bounded by West End Avenue, Washington Street, Orchard Street and 13th Street.”
“The tree removal cost needs to be adjusted to a not to exceed figure of $10,000 due to the purpose of utility location and roadway widening for the redevelopment of this area,” Resolution 163-2022 states.
During discussion, Councilman Jonathan Oliva inquired further.
“The increase from $7,500 to $10,000: was that an additional tree, or a cost estimate?” Oliva said.
Wuillermin replied.
“We are dealing with three trees that the redeveloper says his arborist has identified as in immediate need of being removed. We had the subcommittee meeting where we had discussions about what we thought was a reasonable cost estimate for what it would take to take them down,” Wuillermin said.
Wuillermin said that the town would pay for 50 percent of said cost, and that the town has not yet received an estimate for the tree removal.
“We have made it incumbent upon the developer to provide a cost estimate so that we can sign off on whether we feel that it is reasonable to do for that amount of money,” Wuillermin said.
As per the first resolution, Wuillermin said that it was originally believed that a cost of $5,000 per tree would be an appropriate amount, totaling $15,000—for which the town would be responsible for $7,500.
“There was some other discussion by our attorney who felt that maybe that was a little too conservative, and he felt that maybe we should make sure that we had enough there—and he, when he was negotiating with the developer, set a price of $20,000, so that would make it $10,000. I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect that the amount that we will spend will be anywhere close to that, but—without getting a firm cost proposal—we don’t know,” Wuillermin said.
The resolution passed unanimously.