December 8, 2003

The Ringwood Planning Board rejected developer Jack Levkovitz' plan for 37 homes on West Brook Mountain after nearly 8 months of hearings. The project had been given preliminary approval in January of this year, but the hearings were reopened when CLEAN discovered that the public notice included the wrong lot and block number.

New Jersey DEP Commissioner Bradley Campbell made a surprise appearance at the hearings, requesting that the Board deny the application. He had previously sent two letters to the Board asking them to delay action until the DEP had time to review the file. The first letter, dated November 10th, had not been shared with the public at the hearing. The second, dated December 2nd, was discussed and entered into the record by Board Attorney Shep Peck after a member of the public arrived with several copies and distributed them to the public. The Board had commented at both hearings that the DEP should send someone to the hearings if they were serious about their concern for the project.

The Commissioner stated that West Brook Mountain had been identified to him by concerned residents as an extremely environmentally sensitive site, one deserving of protection. He had obtained transcripts of testimony from several of the prior hearings, including testimony by Dr. Steven Souza, an expert on water quality, and John Thonet, CLEAN's environmental engineer and planner.

He commented that the parcel, with its prime watershed lands, was exactly the type of land that Governor McGreevey had pledged to save. Further, he noted that since no permits had been obtained by Levkovitz, it was unlikely that the plan would pass muster at the DEP during the permitting process. He also noted that new stormwater rules slated for adoption in January would necessitate a complete redesign of the site plan should the project be approved. Board Chairman Elliott Green asked the Commissioner what the difference would be if the Board passed it, then the project was returned to the Board after failing to meet DEP standards. Campbell replied that the DEP cannot be the enforcer in every instance, and that the responsibility lies with local Planning Boards to stringently review site plans and make sure they meet all applicable state and local ordinances. To pass a flawed plan expecting DEP to reject the project would be shirking of the Board's responsibilities. 

Campbell then requested that the Board deny the project based on its deficient stormwater management plan, and the fact that the plan would not meet the soon to be released stormwater rules.

Also testifying was Jim Cosgrove, a stormwater engineering expert for the Windbeam Trout Club.  Cosgrove testified straight from Ringwood's ordinance book, listing numerous ways the plans did not meet local laws. He also showed the Board how the stormwater was inadequate in view of Residential Site Improvement Standards (RSIS) and DEP regulations. His testimony clearly gave the Board the legal ammunition required to deny the project, as several members noted this during the vote. Councilman Allan Van Eck went so far as to thank Skylands CLEAN for bringing the incorrect lot and block information to the board's attention, and giving them a second chance to review the project.

While CLEAN feels vindicated that the issues we raised during this application ultimately proved to be the issues that caused it to be denied, we feel our victory may be only temporary. Mr. Levkovitz has vowed in the press to return with another application for the site that he believes will be approved. CLEAN will be ready when he does.

During the time this application was under review, the developer was building one of the roads without approval, tree farming in wetlands areas on site, and actually closed the road to keep prying eyes from witnessing his activities. You can see photos of this activity by clicking here.

December 2, 2003

The Ringwood Planning Board resumed their hearings on a proposed 37-home subdivision off of Burnt Meadow Road called West Brook Hills II. At the start of the meeting, Planning Board attorney Shep Peck read two letters from NJ Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Bradley Campbell, who has contacted the Planning Board to ask them to delay a decision until the DEP has an opportunity to review the filed plans which require several NJDEP permits.

Peck paraphrased the two letters. One, dated November 10th, had been previously read on that night after the public left the hearing, not during the portion of the hearings devoted to West Brook Hills II. Peck claimed that he had not read the letter on that evening because the board had delayed making a decision as requested (all testimony had not yet been completed on that night).  The second letter was also paraphrased, noting that there were new stormwater rules being implemented that could affect the plans for the subdivision, and again, asking the borough to delay a decision. Trout Club President Bud Korteweg had arrived that evening with 50 copies of the letter in hand for the public, possibly influencing their decision to read the letter during the hearings.

The hearings resumed with additional testimony from Dr. Stephen Souza, who had testified on the November 10th hearing about the faulty stormwater management plans proposed by developer Jack Levkovitz for his 37-home subdivision atop West Brook Mountain. The Windbeam Trout Club and Skylands CLEAN have both presented expert witnesses questioning the plan's effectiveness in keeping the West Brook from being degraded.  Dr. Souza, who had previously testified to the plan's flaws, enumerated several more, including lack of a grading plan for the site, no routing plan, and the need for a DEP stream crossing permit in an area requiring massive fill. His conclusion -- that the plan was not in compliance with the agreement between the developer and North Jersey District Water Supply Commission, and was seriously deficient.

The applicant then provided his own new expert witness, Mr. James Woods, P.E., of the engineering firm Keller & Kirkpatrick. Mr. Woods was charged with determining whether or not proposed detention areas were adequate for the site, and he testified that they were. He further testified that the fact that the detention basins were designed to contain all of the runoff for the produced by a 1 and 1/4 inch storm eliminated the need to worry about whether that amount of rain fell over 2 hours or 24 hours.

CLEAN's attorney Michael Kates questioned Woods about his conclusions, pointing out that the rate of flow was not considered in the calculations. Woods admitted that he had not considered the rate of flow, since his instructions were only to calculate volume for the site. Members of the public also questioned the witness, and it was clear that his charge to only look at volume did not provide enough information to the witness to allow him to adequately assess the stormwater management plan.

The next hearing is December 8 and 8:00 pm.

November 10, 2003

Expert witnesses for Skylands CLEAN and the Windbeam Trout Club gave a thumbs down to the stormwater management plans provided by developer Jack Levkovitz on his 37-home subdivision. His application has been before the Ringwood Planning Board since early this year.

The developer declined to bring his experts, even though the board had requested he do so at the September 22nd hearing so they could question them on the new site plans. Borough Engineer Ed Haack then gave an extremely short report stating that the new plans and stormwater calculations met all requirements, but did not elaborate on any specifics of the newly proposed system. Trout Club Attorney Frank DeVito questioned Haack, attempting to get him to elaborate on how he determined that the plan would protect the stream. Haack refused to elaborate, and was backed up by Planning Board Attorney Shep Peck, who stated that it was not the Borough Professional's job to be presenting plans on behalf of the developer. DeVito did get Haack to state that the new plans satisfied the agreement between North Jersey District Water Supply Commission and the developer.

Environmental Planner and Engineer John Thonet testified for Skylands CLEAN, pointing out serious deficiencies in Levkovitz's stormwater management plan. He noted that several of the calculations were based on faulty information, and that the stormwater management facilities were significantly undersized and would not protect the West Brook from degradation caused by runoff resulting from the subdivision.

Thonet also testified once again to slope calculations for the new lots resulting from reconfiguring the subdivision, which the applicant did just prior to the September 22nd meeting. Based on Skylands CLEAN's calculations, two of the three newly proposed lots did not meet the average slope requirement of 20% in the borough's ordinance. CLEAN provided backup calculations to support their findings. (The developer and borough engineer argued that all three lots met this requirement, but provided no backup calculations to support their claims).

The Windbeam Club stunned the crowd by presenting Dr. Stephen Souza, PhD. as their witness. Trout Club Attorney Frank DeVito and CLEAN's attorney, Michael Kates, had asked the Planning Board to subpoena Dr. Souza at an earlier hearing and were denied. They had requested testimony from Dr. Souza on the agreement that had been struck between Levkovitz and North Jersey District Water Supply Commission. Souza had consulted on that agreement. Souza was given permission by North Jersey District to testify at the hearing.

The audience listened intently as Souza enumerated several areas of concern, and stated that the system as designed would not protect the stream adequately. Dr. Souza testified that the stormwater system as designed was "woefully inadequate" and 'undersized by about 7 times." Citing the lack of a grading plan, incorrect curve numbers, and incorrect analysis of the size of the storms to be accommodated, Souza characterized the stormwater plan as 'seriously flawed' and stated that basic conditions of the agreement had not been met. He also noted that he had previously pointed these deficiencies out to Borough Engineer Haack and the applicant's engineer, Frank Loscalzo, who had agreed to corrections. The corrections had not been made. Board members were extremely impressed, with one member stating that Souza had been the most compelling witness they had seen. Souza's testimony seemed to throw the development's approval, which appeared to be a foregone conclusion, into serious doubt.

Dr. Souza will return to continue his testimony on December 2nd, along with other Trout Club witnesses, and a new witness for the applicant. The Board stated that they wished to vote on the application before the end of the year, due to the fact that a new board will be installed in January. However additional testimony from the public must also be heard, and other witnesses have yet to appear.


October 12, 2003

CLEAN's first Watershed Van Tour was momentarily derailed as a trip through Crescent Road, the site of the West Brook Hills I subdivision, was abruptly ended by developer Jack Levkovitz. The tour had been publicized in the paper and stated its intention of visiting the West Brook Hills site. CLEAN's van, driven by Pequannock River Coalition Executive Director Ross Kushner, arrived at the corner of Burnt Meadow Road and Crescent Drive to find a newly constructed sign stating that the street was a private road and a construction site, and directing would be visitors that only residents and construction workers were permitted on site.

Kushner and CLEAN Director Robin O'Hearn, who had driven through the subdivision many times before, believed the road to be public, and decided to proceed. Once inside the subdivision, they found Mr. Levkovitz waiting for them in his yellow Humvee. Intending only to drive through, they continued on their way until reaching a road block just before the entrance to illegally constructed Sonoma Court.

With the CLEAN group forced to turn around, Mr. Levkovitz stopped the van and informed Kushner that the road was private. When he questioned that fact, Mr. Levkovitz claimed that he maintained the road, and therefore, it was private and could be closed, and directed the group to leave.

CLEAN has been monitoring various problems and activities on the West Brook I site since January 2003. It seems likely that the road has been closed to keep CLEAN from further monitoring activities on site. See the West Brook Hills Hall of Shame for further information.

CLEAN staff and volunteers later researched Mr. Levkovitz' claim of a private road and found that the road was shown as complete on both the subdivision plat filed with Passaic County, and on the Ringwood Borough tax map, both of which are indicators that a road is accepted by the town and is public. CLEAN has since lodged a complaint with the Borough that the road has been illegally closed, and has yet to receive a response from borough officials. It appears that this is another case of the borough looking the other way.

The signs and road block as still in place as of December 4th. However, we expect that when bad weather strikes, the road will be reopened to allow for plowing by Borough trucks, as nearby residents stated that the borough maintained the road last year.

September 22, 2003

Hearings on West Brook Hills II continued with a new site plan by the applicant, and testimony by an aquatic biologist who has monitored the West Brook for years.

The developer, Jack Levkovitz, had submitted new site plans some 10 days earlier. CLEAN had not been informed of the new plan submission, learning of them on the day of the hearing. CLEAN's expert, John Thonet, had no time to review the plans, and while he was on hand for the hearing, declined to testify until he had an opportunity to review them further.

The developer's amendments to the plans included the merging of 5 existing lots into three new ones, based on suggestions made by the Borough Planner, Peter Steck. A new submission of site data claimed that none of the newly proposed lots exceeded 20% average slope, meeting borough requirements. Borough Engineer Ed Haack confirmed this assessment calculating slope the "old fashioned way," which has been the subject of much debate throughout the proceedings.  Neither the developer's engineer, Frank Loscalzo, nor his surveyor, Boyce McGeoch, were on hand to answer any questions about the new plans. Planning Board members requested that both professionals be on hand at the next hearing for questioning.

Haack also presented testimony on the new plans, stating that all lots met zoning requirements and that no variances or waivers were required. Further, Haack claimed that stormwater issues had been adequately addressed. As stated in his report, Haack wrote, "I believe we have addressed, at least once, every reasonable concern that has been raised during this application. It has also become extremely apparent that further discussion of many of the concerns raised will not satisfy the parties that raised those concerns. If a compromise position were attainable, then further discussion might be warranted. Since little compromise is possible and the Planning Board has carefully listened to a great number of opinions, I would submit that the time for decision has arrived."

Frank DeVito, attorney for The Windbeam Trout Club, who had just entered the hearings in August as objectors to the project, took the opportunity of Haack's testimony to cross examine him. He attempted to get Haack to explain how various pollutants would be kept out of the stream, but Haack could not explain how the various compounds and silt would be excluded or eliminated. After over an hour of questioning, Planning Board attorney Shep Peck ended the cross-examination,

The Windbeam Trout Club,  presented their first witness, aquatic biologist Jim Hartzler, of Aquatic Resources of Sailorsburg, Pennsylvania. Hartzler testified that he has monitored and studied the stream since the late 1980's for the Trout Club, doing analysis of the quality of the aquatic life living in the stream, as well as assessing the number and types of fish. While he testified that the stream's current health was good, he cautioned that the stream was clearly "on the edge." Additional threats to the stream in the form of silt and pollution could have serious negative impacts to the health of the stream and the aquatic life present.

Planning Board attorney Peck informed attorney for both CLEAN and the Trout Club that all testimony would be finished at the upcoming hearing on November 10th. DeVito argued that he had additional witnesses who would not necessarily be available, and asked for additional hearing dates, but Peck set the date for November 10, 2003.

In a letter dated September 11, 2003, Planning Board attorney Shep Peck advised Windbeam Trout Club attorney Frank DeVito that the clock had run out on developer Jack Levkovitz' application for a 39-home subdivision off of Burnt Meadow Road. Citing his interpretation of a  provision of the Municipal Land Use Law that requires action by the board within 120 days, Peck warned De Vito that  "we must conclude testimony, we must conclude the open public comment phase, the Board must deliberate and make a decision on September 22. Please be prepared to proceed in a succint fashion with any additional evidence which the Windbeam Fishing Club wishes to present. Time is limited and of the essense. Be guided accordingly."

DeVito, in a reply, gave Peck his own interpretation, stating "For your information there is no reported case in New Jersey that has ever granted a default approval with current active opposition with paid professional experts. This does not take into consideration that this project is of major public interest and has been the subject of major newspaper articles. Your/the Planning Board's 'rush to judgement' is rash and badly advised."

The Planning Board, as they have done throughout, completely ignored CLEAN's ongoing role in the process, neglecting to copy CLEAN's attorney Michael Kates on the letter. Kates had informed the Board at the August 25th hearing of our intention to bring expert witness John Thonet back for further testimony and cross examination on stormwater.

De Vito, who just recently entered the hearings representing the Trout Club, has not yet been allowed to present any of his witnesses. His first witness, Jim Hartzler of Aquatic Resources, who has monitored the Trout Club's portion of the West Brook for several years, had just started his testimony on August 25th when the hearing was concluded for the evening.

DeVito's letter demanded additional hearing dates for his upcoming experts. Referring to August 25th meeting, DeVito said, "We will start on September 22, 2003 with the one expert we started with when the Board interrupted him.  I am no longer requesting an additional date or dates as necessary...but I am now insisting upon it," referring to the need for a date to present expert Jim Cosgrove, who has a conflict on the 22nd.

"The applicant has an easy option is you/he are so concerned about the MLUL 95/120 day requirement. He can either consent to the extensions as is typical and normally granted, or he can refuse you and you can vote to deny [the application]. However, one of the options that is not available to you is to shut down the opposition who have already appeared and started to testify with paid professional experts....If the Board is so concerned with dates and/or time, it can set special hearing dates."

DeVito also had harsh words for the board's prior approval of the 39-home development application.  "I have been informed that this matter was previously approved in two hearing nights in the earlier part of ths year and had to be re-advertised....The concept of a two night approval for a project of this magnitude having so many significant environmental, water quality, erosion and public concerns is a discredit to the Town. How could they have previously approved this project in two nights when your own Planner and Engineer at this time are recommending changes? Your rush to judgement for whatever reason, which you are apparently determined to continue, is an abysmal display of the public trust placed in and excercised by this board."

DeVito has been unable to obtain copies of important documents necessary for review by his experts, a frustration that was echoed by several members of the public. New stormwater calculations were not available to the public prior to the last hearing, the files only having been updated earlier that day. Still unavailable are specifics of he agreement between North Jersey District and developer Levkovitz. An attempt to obtain that document and subpoena experts who consulted on the agreement was also denied by the Planning Board earlier this month.

The Record wrote an article about Peck's call for a vote that can be seen on our press page. Press here to see the story. The article, however, presented the borough's position, but did a very poor job of presenting the Trout Club's position, as you can see from the attached articles.

The attendance of residents at Monday's meeting is critical. The meeting starts at 8:00 pm at Borough Hall, 60 Margaret King Avenue.