July 21, 2016

MINUTES TOWNSHIP OF WEST ORANGE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING July 21, 2016 The West Orange Zoning Board of Adjustment held a regular meeting on July 21, 2016 commencing 8:00 PM at 66 Main Street, West Orange, N.J. in Council Chambers. Chairman Neuer called the meeting to order at approximately 8:00 P.M. It was announced that notification of this meeting was given to the Township Clerk, the West Orange Chronicle and the Star Ledger and posted on the Township Bulletin Board in accordance with the “Open Public Meetings Act.” Chairman Neuer announced that a digital tape recording system is being utilized to record the proceedings of the meeting and instructed the general public on how the audio of the proceedings may be reviewed or obtained. Chairman Neuer asked everyone to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. Alice Beirne, Esq., Board Attorney, read the Opening Statement. PRESENT: B. Buechler, C. Darconte, D. Gabry, D. Nash, P. Neuer, B. Quentzel, I. Schwarzbaum, W. Steinhart, M. Sussman, A. Weiss ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: Paul Grygiel, Township Planner Eric Keller, Consulting Engineer Alice Beirne, Esq., Board Attorney Rose DeSena, Board Secretary H. Grossman, Esq., Public Advocate

ANNOUNCEMENTS Future Meetings: August 18, 2016 (regular meeting) September 15, 2016 (regular meeting) October 20, 2016 (regular meeting) MINUTES Adopt Minutes: June 16, 2016 (regular meeting) Chairman Neuer stated that he and Vice Chairman Buechler submitted their comments to the Board Secretary for the minutes of the June 16, 2016 regular meeting. Chairman Neuer asked the Board Members if they had any additional comments for the June 16, 2016 regular meeting that were submitted to them for review; there were none. Chairman Neuer asked for a motion to approve the minutes of the June 16, 2016 regular meeting. Vice Chairman Buechler made a motion to approve the minutes of the June 16, 2016 regular meeting; Mr. Schwarzbaum seconded the motion and all were in favor with the exceptions of Mr. DarConte, Ms. Gabry and Ms. Weiss who were present but did not vote on these minutes because they were not present at that meeting. SWEARING IN Paul Grygiel, Planner for the Township and Eric Keller, consulting Engineer for the Township were sworn under oath. APPLICATIONS 1. ZB-16-02/Arceo Carried from 6/16/16 Block: 43; Lot: 29; Zone: R-5 70 Lowell Avenue eer Seeking a “c” variance for the height of a retaining wall to be constructed in the rear yard.

EXHIBITS A-2 — Site Plan — revised with a revision date of July 8, 2016 A-3 — Boundary and Elevation Survey dated June 24, 2016 A-4 — Email from the Township’s Construction Official dated June 23, 2016 B-1 — Photo board B-2 — Photo Board Daniel Roma, David Oliverous and Samual Arceo approached the podium and were sworn under oath. Mr. Oliverous stated that Mr. Arceo is the applicant and is his uncle and that he is present to help him with the translation. Mr. Roma stated that they were last heard at the May 19, 2016 Zoning Board meeting and were required to submit revised drawings. Mr. Roma presented revised drawings of the site plan with a revision date of July 8, 2016. Chairman Neuer asked to have the revised site plan marked at Exhibit A-2 for identification. Mr. Roma referred to Exhibit A-1 and detailed all of the revisions. He stated that they incorporated the comments that the Township Engineer recommended to the plans and extended the wall along the left side of the property towards Lowell Avenue. Mr. Roma referred to sheet two (2) of Exhibit A-2 and detailed the retaining wall. He said that the retaining wall will go from two (2) feet on one end of the wall to nine (9) feet because of the slope. Mr. Roma presented the boundary and elevation survey dated June 24, 2016. Chairman Neuer asked to have the boundary and elevation survey marked as Exhibit A-3 for 3

identification. Ms. Gabry noted that the wall on the south side of the property extended over the property line and asked if that structure was going to stay there. Mr. Oliverous stated that his uncle, Mr. Arceo, spoke to the neighbor and the neighbor said that the wall could stay there. Chairman Neuer stated that in order for the wall to remain over the property line the applicant must obtain an easement. Mr. Roma said that the applicant will agree to that. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Roma how high the retaining wall will be at its highest point; he said 9°4” high. Mr. Roma said that the applicant is also proposing to put a 4’ high fence on top of the retaining wall because he wants the rear yard to be safe for his children to play there. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Roma if the wall with the fence on top will now be approximately 14’ high; he replied yes. Mr. Roma said that it will only be 14’ high on the highest end of the wall. He said that the height of the wall is typical in this area because of the slope. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Grygiel to define the township ordinance for installing a fence on top of a wall. Mr. Grygiel stated that solid walls and fences not higher than six (6) feet are permitted in the rear yard and on the side property up to the real line of the applicant’s house. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Arceo if he spoke to his neighbor about removing the tree on his neighbor’s property to install the wall; he said yes. Mr. Arceo said that his neighbor said he can remove the tree because the previous owner planted the tree. Chairman Neuer instructed Mr. Arceo to get a letter from his neighbor that states that he has permission to remove the tree from his neighbor’s property.

Vice Chairman Buechler asked Mr. Roma if the fence on top of the retaining wall is an aluminum fence; he replied yes. Mr. Roma said that it is not a privacy fence. Vice Chairman Buechler asked Mr. Roma if new leaders have to be installed for the proposed seepage pit in the back of the property; he said that they will install new pipe under the leaders that go to the seepage pit. Ms. Gabry asked Mr. Roma if the blocks on the retaining wall are secure; he said yes. Mr. Roma said that they are interlocking blocks and explained how the wall will be reinforced. Mr. Keller stated that the retaining wall will require a building permit to ensure that it is secure. Mr. Quentzel asked Mr. Roma how they are getting the fill; he said they are bringing it in. Mr. Schwarzbaum asked Mr. Roma if the back of the property will be totally flat now; he replied no. He said that there will be an approximate 5% slope after construction. Mr. Sussman asked Mr. Roma if the pavers for the walkway along the southerly side of the property line are over the applicant’s property line; he replied yes. Chairman Neuer stated that the pavers that are over the property line is de minimus and an easement is not required for that. There were no further questions from the Board Members or the Board Professionals. Chairman Neuer asked if any members of the public had any questions for Mr. Roma. Dorothy Butler approached the podium and stated that her mother lives at 88 Lawrence Avenue. Ms. Butler asked Mr. Roma if any portion of the ground was included in the 9” height of the wall; he replied no.

Ms. Butler asked Mr. Roma if the applicant is moving soil in his yard. Mr. Oliverous responded that they are removing debris in the yard. He said that the Mr. Arceo received an email from the Township’s Construction Official, Mr. Tracy, which stated that he is approved to remove the debris. Chairman Neuer asked to have the email from Mr. Tracy dated June 23, 2016 marked as Exhibit A-4 for identification. Ms. Butler asked Mr. Roma where the debris was disposed of; he said that a contractor took the debris. Ms. Butler asked Mr. Roma when the screening for the soil erosion will be installed; he said when the application is approved. Chairman Neuer stated for the record that the Township Engineer, Mr. Lepore, stated in his letter dated May 16, 2016 that a soil erosion and sediment control permit is not required. Ms. Butler asked Mr. Roma how the applicant intends on building the wall because her mother will not permit the applicant to access her property; he said that they can build the wall from the applicant’s property. Ms. Butler asked Mr. Roma if the applicant removed bushes from her mother’s property; he said that the applicant removed some bushes and replanted them. Mr. Roma said that after the applicant had a new survey done for the property he realized that some of the bushes that he removed were on the neighbor’s property. Chairman Neuer stated that if the application is approved there will be a condition stating that the neighbor will not grant access from her property to build the retaining wall and that no additional bushes will be removed. Ms. Butler presented two photo boards that were marked as Exhibit B-1 and Exhibit B-2 for identification. Ms. Butler referred to the Exhibits and asked Mr. Roma why the applicant took down the existing 8’ retaining wall; he said that it was removed because it was in bad condition. 6

For the record, Mr. Arceo stated that the old retaining was 71/2’ and not 8’ high. Ms. Butler asked Mr. Roma how they will prevent water from seeping on to her mother’s property; he said that they are proposing to install a seepage pit. Ms. Butler asked Mr. Roma who is going to be responsible for inspecting the wall to ensure it is done right. Chairman Neuer stated that the township’s building department will do the inspection. Ms. Butler asked Mr. Roma if any of the weep holes in the wall will be pointing to her mother’s yard; he replied no. Christine Scioscia approached the podium and stated that her mother lives at 88 Lawrence Avenue, Ms. Scioscia asked Mr. Roma where the highest part of the wall will be in relation to 88 Lawrence Avenue; he referred to a photo on Exhibit A-1 showing the location of the proposed wall in relation to 88 Lawrence Avenue. Mr. Roma stated that the wall will not be visible from 88 Lawrence Avenue once the bushes grow. There were no further questions for Mr. Roma. Chairman Neuer asked if any members of the public had any comments. Dorothy Butler approached the podium and was sworn under oath. She stated that her mother, Dora Ricci, lives at 88 Lawrence Avenue and she is concerned with how the 9 %’ wall with a 4’ fence on top of it will impact her mother’s property value because it will change the look of her mother’s property. Ms. Butler said that she just wants to make sure that the applicant does what he is required to do. Vice Chairman Buechler asked Ms. Butler if she grew up in the house on Lawrence Avenue; she replied yes. Vice Chairman Buechler asked Ms. Butler if there was always a retaining wall there; she said 7

that there was a smaller retaining wall along a property on Florence Avenue. Ms. Weiss asked Ms. Butler if she felt that the 4’ fence placed on top of the retaining wall will be unappealing; she replied yes. Ms. Gabry stated that if the applicant does not put a retaining wall along the back of his property there will be erosion. Ms. Butler said that the applicant testified to bringing in dirt and raising the grade of the slope. She said the prior owner only had grass in the rear yard and there was never erosion. Mr. Schwarzbaum asked Ms. Butler how high the bushes are along the proposed wall; she said three (3) feet. Mr. Schwarzbaum said that if trees were planted in that area it could hide the wall. Ms. Butler said that it is not only about aesthetics. Mr. Schwarzbaum asked Mr. Grygiel if arborvitae trees were planted there would it cover the wall; he said yes. Mr. Grygiel said that arborvitae is the typical tree used for a buffer. Chairman Neuer advised Mr. Schwarzbaum that if he wanted to suggest that as a condition, the trees would have to be planted on the neighbor’s property and they would have to agree to that. There were no further comments from the public and Chairman Neuer closed the public hearing. Chairman Neuer asked for a motion. Vice Chairman Buechler made a motion to approve the application with the following conditions: 1. Applicant must submit a copy of an executed easement for the retaining wall to be 8

constructed on the southerly side prior to the resolution. 2. Applicant must use clean fill 3. Seepage pit will be moved to the center of the back yard and revised plans must be submitted showing that and the PVC piping being installed to connect the seepage pit with the downspouts or the leaders, as applicable 4. Soil erosion materials required on all sides 5. Wall will be one (1) foot from the property line — surveyor required to come out and mark the property Applicant must use a licensed contractor. No weep holes along the wall facing 88 Lawrence Avenue The wall must be built according to the plans Applicant must replace the bushes he removed from the neighbor’s property 39 po ST ON Ms. Gabry seconded the motion to approve the application and added two conditions: 10. Letter from the applicant’s neighbor stating that the applicant can remove the tree that is on their property 11. The applicant cannot access the neighbor’s property at 88 Lowell Avenue to construct the wall Chairman Neuer called for the vote. Mr. DarConte stated that the issue is not the retaining wall; he said the dirt that the applicant brought in created an issue and then it required a wall. Mr. DarConte said that is the issue. Mr. Quentzel said he is concerned about the safety of the children playing in the yard and he feels that planting trees along the wall will help the aesthetics. Mr. Schwarzbaum encouraged the applicant to talk to the neighbors at 88 Lowell Avenue and put up arborvitae.

The vote was as follows: Buechler DarConte: Gabry: D. Nash: Quentzel: Schwarzbaum: Steinhart: Sussman: Weiss: Chairman Neuer: Chairman Neuer urged the applicant to follow the resolution and to make sure he gets all of the required inspections. *Note from Board Secretary — Exhibits B-1 and B-2 were marked for identification and not admitted as evidence therefore Ms. Beirne returned the Exhibits to the objector. Chairman Neuer called for a recess at 9:22 pm. Chairman Neuer resumed the meeting at 9:34 pm. 2. ZB-16-05/Seton Hall Preparatory School Block 82.01; Lot: 1; Zone: R-1 700 Prospect Avenue Amended Site Plan Carried from 6/16/16 Seeking a “d” variance for the expansion of a non-conforming use and bulk variances. EXHIBITS A-6 — Landscape Plan dated 4/19/16 A-7 — Revised Utility & Grading Plan dated 7/5/16 10