Morristown council says no to Rooftop at Iron Bar

Morristown council voted down a rooftop bar, April 12, 2021. Screenshot by Marion Filler
21

 

By Marion Filler
After hearing four-and-a-half hours of Zoom testimony, the Morristown council voted 4-1 on Monday to deny the Iron Bar’s request to serve liquor on its rooftop.

“I can’t say that this would be in the best interest of the Town,” said Council Vice President Toshiba Foster.

“There are a lot of issues that are still missing that this board is being asked to take on faith,” summarized Matthew Moench, attorney for Joe Lobozzo, who owns apartments across from the South Street bar.

“They are saying, ‘Trust us that we’ll be able to addresses these issues,'” said Moench, “but “they have a job to convince the board and have not met their burden.”

Most callers agreed. Councilwoman Tawanna Cotten cast the only vote for the application. The Iron Bar sought to extend its liquor license — also shared by the adjacent Revolution beer hall–to include 134 seats on the bar’s roof.

The discussion was dominated by concerns about noise levels, a source of irritation for residents in the past.

Morristown council voted down a rooftop bar, April 12, 2021. Screenshot by Marion Filler

“When we talk about credibility, the idea that putting 134 people on a roof is not going to increase noise or impact residents in the area is simply not credible,” said Moench, disputing testimony last month by an Iron Bar audio expert.

This tension was illustrated in a lively exchange between Historic District resident Donna McNamara and Darrell Remlinger,  who oversees operations at the Iron Bar for owner Jimmy Cavanaugh.

Referring to pre-pandemic numbers, McNamara asked, “How many nights of the year do you hit maximum capacity?”

Receiving a vague reply, she rephrased the question. “What is the range for a weeknight?”

When that didn’t work, she tried again. “What is the percentage increase that you are hoping to gain with the rooftop investment?”

“Zero,” said Remlinger, asserting that Iron Bar simply wanted to offer patrons the opportunity to dine outdoors, and for the restaurant to stay “competitive.” His response was met with incredulity by caller after caller, as well as council members.

“I don’t get it,” said Councilman David Silva, “and I’m a very generous person.”

Although he supports business interests, he said, “I was elected by the Morristown residents to advocate for them.” Most of his emails regarding the rooftop were from residents who oppose it. “The ones who are in favor do not live here.”

The Iron Bar had suggested some conditions for approval: No increase in the 1,046-customer joint maximum for the Iron Bar and Revolution, no food or beverages served on the roof after 11 pm, no music or cooking there, and nobody under 21 without a parent or guardian. Signs would ask patrons to refrain from loud conversations.

Councilwoman Sandi Mayer wanted to know how excessive noise on the rooftop would be managed, and was told that the staff would be responsible using “common sense.”

Eric Zwerling, who teaches at Rutgers University but is not a licensed engineer, said that the quality of windows in nearby residences would play a large part in keeping out noise. However, he could not say the same for an open window.

Neither he nor Matthew Anderson, who is an engineer, took readings from neighboring residences at the Metropolitan apartments building, behind the 40 Park condos, or at The Lofts apartments on DeHart Street.

That was a sticking point for Foster, the council vice president.

“I’m totally in support of rooftop dining, she said, but there is “no way I could confidently support an application that disregarded those properties,” she said.

Councilman Robert Iannaconne reminded Remlinger  and Iron Bar attorney Robert C. Williams  that Morristown was considering a noise ordinance that will be enforced by trained personnel.

Penalties could include fines, as well as the authority to shut down the premises. He was also concerned about parking, and learned that it has not yet been addressed by the Iron Bar.

Cotten was the only council member who supported the application. “It was determined that people talking would not significantly impact the sound level,” she said.

Williams got the last word before the vote was taken. “You don’t sit here to determine if noise is a problem. It’s not within your jurisdiction. What you should consider is if alcohol can be served safely on the rooftop.”

He added: “This could be a BYOB, and we don’t want that to happen.”

No promises made by the Iron Bar have ever been broken he said, noting that the license could always be suspended if there is a violation.

It wasn’t enough to sway the council, which doubles as the town’s Alcoholic Beverage Control board.  It handed Williams a rare defeat in his years of advocating for Cavanaugh’s bars.

Council President Stefan Armington, who is being sued by Cavanaugh, recused himself. Councilman Michael Elms was absent.

 

If you’ve read this far… you clearly value your local news. Now we need your help to keep producing the local coverage you depend on! More people are reading Morristown Green than ever. But costs keep rising. Reporting the news takes time, money and hard work. We do it because we, like you, believe an informed citizenry is vital to a healthy community.

So please, CONTRIBUTE to MG or become a monthly SUBSCRIBER. ADVERTISE on Morristown Green. LIKE us on Facebook, FOLLOW us on Twitter, and SIGN UP for our newsletter.

21 COMMENTS

  1. The mayor and council are on a mission to put us out of business. Going against the support shown for our rooftop dining. A safe prooosal.

  2. So let’s discuss joe lobozza the mayors friend who gets whatever he wants at the planning board, 2 months after iron bar filed a federal suit against the mayor mr. Lobozza hired his noise consultant this was in 2019. At the liceNee meeting he admitted he couldn’t show evening noise came from any one source. So the report never saw the light of day. Now present day we apply to extend our license for roof top dining. Lobozza dusts off the report and attempts to show that it represents the roof top dining. It was obvious it was used to give the council a reason to reject. The report never dealt with the roof. Lobozza has offered apartments to the mayors friends for favors at the request of the mayor. This will all come out at trial.

  3. Someone suggests a simple and fair solution – defining noise levels and putting it in an ordinance (which is surely what most other less “jersey” towns and cities do) and people jump all over it like it’s not a fair and reasonable solution. Very telling that the anon trolls here have such a narrow and unthoughtful agenda.

  4. This hearing went far afield of what the council looks at sitting as the ABC board. Profit and loss, sound issues are what the planning board reviews. We were being proactive with our sound consultant so improvements would be incorporated in the plan. Yes additional improvements can be added if the ordinance is violated. This council is controlled by the mayor who tried to extort us into giving his son a piece of our business that’s why we are in federal court suing him and the town. The powers to be use 5 multi millionaires from 40 park as an excuse, there are 70 families living there many are customers.

  5. How did anyone expect a different outcome? The burden of proof isn’t on the neighbors or the Council and Iron Bar provided nothing to assuage the noise fear of their neighbors. What does an engineer do without data and analysis (Zwerling and Andersen)? It depends upon the quality of the windows? Did they walk up there and have a beer and decide the view was good? What kind of manager hopes for zero increase in traffic and zero return on investment (Remlinger)? For the Town to provide an objective review (like if it went they other way and they were challenged by the neighbors at 40 Park), I would think the Council would need more than they were provided. It was weakly supported request.

  6. Mr. Fedupflyer – I would greatly surmise the bar in Texas that became very loud had more than just people eating food. The proposal here already eliminated music and standing bar areas.

  7. It seems a vengeful act to deny Cavanaugh his rooftop bar while approving Sterling. Kudos to all who have recognized that residents knew they were purchasing among restaurants and bars when they purchased or rented their places. They wanted to be downtown, so now to object to “noise” is ridiculous. How can you want to live downtown and yet want “quiet”. Doesn’t make any sense. We all know that Cavanaugh has had his problems with town officials from day one! They need to end that war! Denying this application which would make Morristown even more of a destination for something different is not good. People in Hoboken and Manhattan love their rooftop bars!

  8. I am all for adding to the draw of Morristown with rooftop bars etc. and enjoy being part of a vibrant town.

    We had a similar thing happen when we lived in Texas and can confirm rooftop ‘bar/restaurant’ sound does indeed travel surprisingly well and was very loud and very noticeable over ‘commercial AC units’. The noise from the change of use really negatively impacted our apartment.

    In the city where we lived it had a clear noise ordinance and we used that to resolve the issues and the restaurant had to make significant changes. That is what is missing here – in addition to future promises from the bar there need to be clear enforceable noise limits in place for residents.

    Morristown would be better served by adopting and applying a transparent, auditable noise ordinance for the protection of both bar owners and residents. Once that is in place then I see no reason not to approve these types of developments…

  9. Margret, how about you go inside the apartment building across the street during the day, and I will yell as loud as I can on top of Iron Bar sitting at a table, and we will see if you can hear one word I’m saying, or even hear me at all.

    Absolutely ridiculous how this is your argument. Just looking for some excuse so you don’t have to admit you despise all of the development, particularly any of the bars.

  10. We are on a very serious slippery slope if we start declaring winners and losers based on the clientele that a business attracts (in the absence of illegal activities). There should be objective measures, consistently applied to all businesses in the downtown area. If rooftop dining is deemed too loud, then sidewalk dining should be banned as well. The people who purchased those condos knew that they were living on top of and next door to very popular restaurants and bars in a growing, vibrant and popular town.

  11. Not to mention, you wouldn’t even be able to hear 100 people from the other side of the rooftop eating dinner over the commercial AC fans on the roof!! Crazy argument.

  12. It faces the Green as much as it could, Margret. And those apts are across the street of a very busy and noisy downtown urban area to begin with! Since music is not even allowed up there you would not even be able to hear the people across the street talking while eating dinner! Why would you hear the people on the rooftop rather than the hundreds of people eating on the street level, with music playing through open doors at these restaurants, and hundreds of cars moving through all day long?

    Put some 8ft glass walls along the edge of the building for safety as well as further noise mitigation and this should not be a problem whatsoever.

  13. While I am in favor of Iron’s rooftop, you can’t compare it to Stirling’s– Stirling is not near any condos or apartments. Stirling is also more a restaurant and their bar caters to an older crowd

  14. Yet another example of the town discriminating against this business owner. Surely, the Stirling Tavern had to pass the same silly noise tests that they are holding this establishment to. Is there a different standard of acceptable noise level based on what your address is in the downtown area? If so, how is that determined and enforced? At what point as you move up South Street does the acceptable noise level at Stirling become unacceptable? This is ripe for another law suit.

  15. Check out the plan. The proposed bar faces the apartments on the other side of South St. and not the Green.

    I find it sad that Conner’s love of bars prevents him from respecting the rights of his tax paying neighbors.

    The other rooftop bar was approved specifically because it would not impact any nearby residents.

  16. But again, it’s ok for the Stirling tavern to have it. If you live in or move to any area of the green you should expect noise. C’mon, it’s like a little city. Things change and you have to adapt or move. Example, I lived in morristown for 25 years. I’ve been gone for 11. It’s alot different now but that’s not a bad thing. I’d still be there if rents weren’t so ridiculous. When I moved into my new place, 11 years ago, there were no kids around, and by kids I mean young children. My next door neighbor has had 3 since I moved here. They are constantly outside playing, running around and making noise. Sometimes into my yard. So like I said, sometimes things change. I can choose to move if it’s annoying me or I can stay. My choice. Same for the people in the vicinity of the green in morristown. How can anyone not expect noise there. And how about the giant outdoor venue that the Walsh’s just opened next to tashmoo?? That’s ok? That’s not going to cause additional noise? This whole thing is ridiculous and I believe just 1 more thing the “town” can do to “stick it to” Jimmy Cavanaugh . I had the pleasure of working for Jimmy managing at Jimmy’s Haunt. I worked alongside of Darrell and I can tell you, they know what they’re doing. And if they say they’ll do something, they’ll do it. This denial to them seems like a whole lot more bs.

  17. So sad.

    “If the restriction on activities on the roof were actually enforced , how many would want to climb up all those stairs to sit outside in all kinds of weather ” – Margret, once again your opinion of how and what you think others should do astounds me. Econ 101. There is a reason a business entrepreneur wants to build this business and not listen to your opinion. I guarantee you, many people who live in town including myself would be more than happy and look forward to walking up stairs to go eat and have a drink overlooking the green. MORE than happy. Your opinion on what this town wants as far businesses, eateries and bars goes has been 1000% wrong over the last decade, yet you still will not admit how wrong you are. Just amazing.

  18. Things were worded very carefully. Although the time of service was restricted, there was no limit set on how long patrons could linger over what they ordered at the cut off time or how long the staff had to serve those orders.
    The sound tests were quite selective. Key spots were omitted in the tests. Also, many issues that could have a severe impact were left for future hearings by the Planning Board and yet if the Council as the ABC had already approved the expanded use, what could the Planning Board do to address those issues in any meaningful way.
    If the restriction on activities on the roof were actually enforced , how many would want to climb up all those stairs to sit outside in all kinds of weather .

  19. Check the record…Elms is always absent for voting on important matters. Especially when it revolves around Iron Bar.

    PS: Really? Noise from patrons on the roof, when there is no music, limited seating and restrictive times of service?? This is what decision is based on?

LEAVE A REPLY