TOWNSHIP OF RIVER VALE PLANNING BOARD January 5, 2015 REORGANIZATION/REGULAR MEETING MINUTES

Transcription

1 ADEQUATE NOTICE STATEMENT: TOWNSHIP OF RIVER VALE PLANNING BOARD January 5, 2015 REORGANIZATION/REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APPROVED A Regular Meeting of the River Vale Planning Board was called to order at 8:00 p.m. The following statement was read: "This is a Reorganization/Regular Meeting of the Planning Board of the Township of River Vale. I am informed by the Clerk that adequate public notice has been provided by mailing notice to the Pascack Valley News/Post Review and The Record, by posting notice on the bulletin board in the Municipal Building, and by filing a copy of the notice to all persons who requested the same and prepaid the cost fixed by the Board". The Planning Board saluted the flag. =========================================================== ROLL CALL: Members Present: Kenneth H. Koons George Shalhoub Mark Ericksen Scott Lippert Kevin Martin Raymond Harvey Peter Wayne John Donovan Also Present: Marc E. Leibman, Esq. Christopher Statile Carolyn Reiter Joanne Allgor Chairman Vice-Chairman Secretary Class I Mayor s Designee Class II Class III - Councilman Board Attorney Board Engineer Board Planner Land Use Administrator Absent: Glen Jasionowski Class I-Mayor Alejandro Alvarez Alternate #1

2 REORGANIZATION MEETING Kenneth Koons turned the meeting over to Marc Leibman, Esq. for the swearing in of the Board Members. Swearing in of New Board Members: The following Board Members were sworn in by the Board Attorney: Raymond Harvey, Class I (Mayor s Designee) Term Ending 12/31/18 John Donovan, Class III (Councilman) Term Ending 12/31/18 Peter Wayne, Class II Term Ending 12/31/18 Kenneth Koons Term Ending 12/31/18 Election of Officers: The following Officers were elected: Election of Chairman: Mr. Leibman requested a nomination for Chairman. Mr. Shalhoub nominated Kenneth Koons as Chairman, with second by Mr. Ericksen. There were no further nominations. Mr. Shalhoub moved to close nominations, with second by Mr. Ericksen and all ayes. On roll call vote, all members voted yes on the nomination. Chairman Koons extended thanks to the Board. Election of Vice-Chairman: Chairman Koons requested a nomination for Vice- Chairman. Mr. Ericksen nominated George Shalhoub as Vice- Chairman, with second by Mr. Lippert. There were no further nominations. Chairman Koons moved to close nominations, with second by Mr. Lippert and all ayes. On roll call vote, all members voted yes on the nomination. Vice-Chairman Shalhoub thanked the Board. Election of Secretary: Chairman Koons requested a nomination for Secretary. Mr. Shalhoub nominated Mark Ericksen as Secretary, with second by Mr. Martin. There were no further nominations. Chairman Koons moved to close nominations, with second Mr. Martin and all ayes. On roll call vote, all members voted yes on the nomination. Mr. Ericksen thanked the Board. 2

3 Appointment of Board Professionals: A motion to appoint the Board Professionals for a Term Ending 12/31/15, was made by Mr. Donovan, seconded by Mr. Shalhoub and carried, as follows: Marc Leibman, Esq., Board Attorney Christopher Statile, Board Engineer Carolyn Reiter, Board Planner The Board Professionals were sworn in by the Board Attorney. Approval of the 2015 By-Laws: A motion for approval of the By-Laws for 2015, was made by Chairman Koons, seconded by Mr. Shalhoub and carried unanimously. Approval of 2015 Meeting Dates: The Board reviewed and discussed the meeting dates for A motion for approval of the 2015 Meeting Dates was made by Chairman Koons, seconded by Mr. Shalhoub and carried unanimously on roll call vote. REGULAR MEETING MINUTES: The Minutes of the 12/1/14 Meeting were approved on motion made by Mr. Martin, with second by Vice-Chairman Shalhoub, and carried. RESOLUTIONS: 1. MWD River Vale One, LLC, 649 Westwood Avenue, Block 2206, Lot 12 Revision of an Approved Site Plan Marc Leibman, Esq. recited the changes per the comments and conditions, which were accepted by Tim Dunn, Esq., applicant s attorney. A motion for approval of Resolution deemed as read, as amended, was made by Chairman Koons and seconded by Mr. Martin. There were no further questions, comments or discussions. On roll call vote, Mr. Shalhoub, Mr. Martin, Mr. Wayne, and Chairman Koons voted yes. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Tsomos & Anagnostakos, 506 Cleveland Avenue, Block 1511, Lot 25 Kevin Martin recused himself and stepped down from the dais. Dean Stamos, Esq. represented 3

4 the applicant. The proposal was for a new lot with 1 width of 105, and at direction of the Board, they moved the proposed property line to a location that allows for frontage and a width of 120, which is compliant. Chairman Koons commented it is not correct. It is less than 120 because it is measured perpendicular to the lot line. Mr. Statile clarified it is a variance of 4, since there is a slight skew. Mr. Stamos continued. They have created a variance condition in the existing home of 8 to the carport and 8.4 to the deck. He asked the Board to grant the variances. Chairman Koons called for their argument to be presented and put forth for the record. Attorney Leibman advised it is within the Board s discretion to require the testimony from a professional planner. Mr. Stamos indicated certainly if it is the Board s preference, they would provide same. Chairman Koons commented in his opinion, the proofs should be submitted. This was the consensus of the five Board Members eligible to vote. Mr. Stamos would return with a planner. There was another issue concerning the building envelope, per the Chairman and Mr. Statile, for Lot 25. There were no further comments from the Board. The matter was opened to the public. A member of the public, Peter Cerrati, 516 Cleveland Avenue, asked if the plans were available to view. Mr. Statile showed him the plan. Board Attorney Leibman advised if the Board acted favorably on the application, they would request landscaping between the existing and proposed homes. The matter was carried to 2/2/15 with a revised drawing to be submitted. There would be no further notice. Mr. Martin returned to the dais. Mr. Lippert recused himself from the next application, Bear Brook Builders, and departed. 2. Bear Brook Builders, LLC, 870 Westwood Avenue, Block 1901, Lot 6 Preliminary and Final Major Subdivision with Soil Movement (Mr. Lippert recused) Antimo Del Vecchio, Esq. represented the applicant in a continued hearing. Chairman Koons stated the new Board Members would have to listen to tapes of the prior hearings to be eligible to vote. 4

5 Mr. Tencza continued under oath with regard to the Tree Replacement and Landscaping Plan, per the Ordinance. This plan uses a larger size trees measuring up to what the ordinance requires, he explained. An alternate plan was also presented as a strict compliance plan. This would use smaller stock trees in greater quantity. Those were the two choices. Mr. Tencza provided a greater summary of what was provided on the plans. Mr. Tencza testified what they proposed is a landscaping as well as tree replacement plan, which is a win-win for the town and the future homeowners. They also provided a plan in strict compliance with the Code, with smaller caliper plants. There was a shortfall with that, and he explained they would create a woodland on each site, so as to have the 275 trees at 2.5 caliper. The plan on the easel was the original plan with the larger size trees. The alternate plan is entitled, Alternate Tree Replacement/Landscaping Plan dated 10/28/14, last revised 11/12/14. Mr. Del Vecchio summarized what was before the Board was the originally proposed landscaping plan and the alternate plan. Chairman Koons commented it has always been the Board s procedure that the applicant puts forth their best plan. Mr. Del Vecchio clarified they put their best plan in their proposal, but were prepared with an alternate plan that was in strict compliance with the Code. Mr. Martin expressed concern and asked about the likelihood of the trees not growing in six months. Mr. Tencza responded nature will not let that happen. A woodland growth would appear naturally over years. These will survive as a woodland. Mr. Martin asked if they take the original plan, would they grow faster and better. Mr. Tencza responded these trees would grow better than woodland trees. The original plan has a greater crosssection and caliper inch, at greater dollar value. Mr. Statile commented these trees will have to be watered the bigger the tree, the more water. Mr. Tencza commented there is a root growth product and another product that holds and releases more moisture. These two elements have upheld the developer s guarantees, whereby they have not had to replace many trees. Questions by the Board followed. Mr. Tencza provided clarification. Mr. Del Vecchio stated the plan complies 5

6 with the ordinance and is the best plan for the neighborhood, development and site. They want to do what is right for the site. If the Board wants technical compliance, that is fine; this plan is actually more expensive. Mr. Martin commented can you bring in the one plan you propose. Mr. Del Vecchio advised they concluded their direct testimony of Mr. Tencza. If the Board has questions on either plan, they will answer them. Mr. Martin asked if the new trees on the original plan will be negatively affected by the existing trees and vice versa. Mr. Tencza replied no. Mr. Donovan asked of the required replacement trees, how many are because of the new road. Mr. Tencza replied he did not believe anyone counted them up. They would count them. Chairman Koons commented on the original plan there are less trees at a larger caliper, with less chance of them dying. Mr. Shalhoub commented the owners would want more lawn area and cut them down. Mr. Martin agreed. Mr. Shalhoub had questions as to what trees were staying. Mr. Tencza noted on the plan that the symbols for the existing trees on the original drawing are the ones staying. They are deciduous and shown on Sheet 6 of 8 the tree inventory. Mr. Shalhoub asked what size they grow to. The response was it varies. Sunset Maples and Blue Spruces grow large. Mr. Tencza ran down the list. Mr. Donovan asked Mr. Statile if he feels the caliper measurement is efficient and was he satisfied. Mr. Statile commented yes, and he hopes the 3.5 caliper trees are available. Mr. Tencza said he will find them. Mr. Del Vecchio asked to mark the alternate plan Exhibit A25. There were no further questions. opened to the public. The matter was William Bailey, Esq. came forward with questions of Mr. Tencza. With regard to tree #16.22, a 48 oak tree, he asked what the situation was in connection with the other trees. Mr. Statile commented to save the tree, the grading plan has to change. Mr. Tencza stated they moved them 40 apart. Mr. Statile commented that tree is not slated to stay. Mr. Baily continued with direct questioning of Mr. Tencza about the removal of trees and tree #16.22 specifically. It was calculated that approximately 20% of the trees between 6 and 16 will be removed. Mr. Bailey was checking to see if the ordinance was being followed. 6

7 Mr. Del Vecchio advised the calculation was on the drawing. Lapatka Associates did the inventory. Mr. Bailey had no further questions. Chairman Koons commented this type of scheme does not appear to permit much of a yard, with pools and swing sets. The homeowners may rip out the newly planted trees. A tree fund was proposed in lieu of some of the plantings to have control over them. Mr. Tencza tried to put the trees along the property boundaries, Mr. Statile noted. Mr. Martin felt the tree fund was a good idea. Mr. Statile noted many existing trees would have to be taken out. Mr. Martin suggested leaving all the existing trees, slowly filling in the areas where the people will not put in pools and swing sets. Mr. Statile commented he did not see many new trees in the yards. Mr. Martin commented the original plan was better than the existing plan. Mr. Del Vecchio referred to Lot All of the light circles and clusters are the existing trees. For more lawn area, they have to add more replacement trees. Mr. Tencza left those trees and filled in along the property line to have a buffer from the neighbor, which repeats itself in between the lots. They did not want to cut down even more trees and increase their quantity for replacement. Mr. Statile asked if the 40 tree shown on Sheet 7, #16.22 was being retained, and the response was no. There was discrepancy on the plan where it was shown as remaining on the engineering plan and being removed on the landscaping plan. Mr. Baily came forward and said removing it may exacerbate the hydrology problem, commenting the question is whether this site is suitable for this development. Mr. Tencza s testimony was complete. Mr. Del Vecchio stated they would recalculate the numbers they needed to and return at the next meeting. The two lots would be screened to address the comments. The landscape testimony was complete. The matter was carried to the 2/2/15 meeting as second on the agenda, with no further notice. The Board then hear Mr. Bailey s case. PAYMENT OF INVOICES: None DISCUSSION: None OPEN TO PUBLIC FOR NON-AGENDA ITEMS: None 7

8 NEXT MEETING: Monday, February 2, 2015 at 8:00 pm. ADJOURNMENT: On motion made, seconded and carried, the meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Mary R. Verducci, Paralegal Recording Secretary 8