More bullcaca served up Hekemian-style, via Michael Dipple of L2A Land Design

Even though they are imperviously covering approximately 9 acres with asphalt and buildings alongside the Hackensack River, and removing hundreds of water-absorbing trees, Hekemian’s engineer, Michael Dipple, wants us to believe that the opposed overdevelopment on UW property -- if completed -- will actually IMPROVE the flooding in the area. “I cannot increase the stormwater runoff, in fact, I have to reduce it significantly,” he says.

And who is going to be checking Dipple’s handiwork?  Apparently, not even him. When Oradell resident Brian Confino asked Dipple if he’s had noise complaints on other comparable sites, Dipple said, “I don’t really continue once the development is constructed…I’m usually involved in the design.” Yeow…that’s kind of scary. How does he gauge the effectiveness of his work if he doesn’t look back? Isn’t that Successful Project Management 101: “plan, execute, evaluate”? I mean he’s an engineer afterall, not an apple picker.

Dipple testified that he presented his plans to the Borough and our Borough engineer had some “tweaks.”  This was a teensy bit concerning to me also since I would have hoped he would have had these tweaks worked out by now in his career.  What if our engineer didn’t notice these things that needed to be tweaked? According to the Borough minutes, Dipple admitted at the April 19^th meeting that “the science of hydrology and hydraulics” is “not an exact science.” He said, they “could not predict how a storm hits, but they use the best data they have available.”

Which brings me to a real sore issue with New Milford residents:  The best data they have available is a 32-YEAR-OLD MAP.  Holy crap. And worse yet, Dipple is sticking to it.

Though Dipple testified:

*  that he is “aware of the flooding events that have taken place over the last several years”;

*  that “the frequency of severe storms has increased”;

*  that this property “did take on flood water” (referencing in particular the 2007 storm); and

*  that he has “seen photographs of flood waters on the [UW] site,"

he repeatedly states -- with a straight face -- that because THE MAP does not show flooding on that site, that means “the water does not go to that site.”

THE MAP is KING. Apparently, in the state of NJ, if you discover there is flooding on the property you are about to develop, you can’t acknowledge that unfortunate fact, unless THE MAP acknowledges it first.

Powerful storms such as Hurricane Irene could become more frequent weather events, according to researchers from MIT and Princeton University. The team has found that with climate change, such storms could make landfall far more frequently, causing powerful, devastating storm surges every three to 20 years. http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/smart-takes/the-morning-briefing-climate-change/22901

Changing weather patterns, erosion, and development can affect floodplain boundaries. FEMA is currently updating and modernizing the nations Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMS). These digital flood hazard maps provide an official depiction of flood hazards for each community and for properties located within it. http://www.floodsmart.gov/floodsmart/pages/flooding_flood_risks/understanding_flood_maps.jsp

Dipple also seems to feel that because he is following THE RULES and REGULATIONS, this absolves him of any liability for his actions. When things go awry, it’s okay because it was approved. Sounds to me like he’s pawning his professional and personal responsibilities off on the regulatory authorities as if that’s where they end.

Oradell resident, Tomasina Schwartz asked Dipple if he was aware of any successful lawsuits against his firm “once the project has been sold to the developer?”

“Against my firm in particular?” Dipple asked.

“Yeah,” Tomasina said. “Like, let’s say because you’re using a map that is over 30 years old….”

“I know that I have not been sued,” Dipple said. (You have not been sued YET Mr. Dipple.)

Barbara Monahan asked Dipple, “How much common sense is used in creating this development? A lot of legal regulations are taken into consideration. Is common sense also added into the formula to come up with this plan?”

“Of course, common sense is something that we use everyday,” Dipple said. “There are regulations that regulate development. I can’t help it but I’m required to follow that….” (Do these regulations somehow exclude factoring in those things that don’t show up on the map like FLOOD WATERS ON THE PROPOSED SITE up to 6 feet deep?)

 “Are you protected in any way,” Barbara asked Dipple, “you personally or your firm, from possible litigation of possible loss of property or life in the future if some of the legal requirements that have been taken into consideration, the speculation and the common sense that you’ve used could possibly cause harm?”

“Objection,” DelVechhio interjected. “Calls for a legal conclusion that this witness isn’t qualified to give.”

Well, even if we’re not going to get an answer, I think every one of Hekemian’s EXPERT witnesses needs to be asked this same question, because a conscience-less mentality appears to be prevalent. “You seem to be questioning my ability to make a decision,” Dipple said to New Milford resident Anna Leone.

No, Mr. Dipple, you’ve got that wrong, we’re questioning your ability to “care.” Because you and your client are doing something that is going to hurt the residents of New Milford, and that doesn’t seem to be weighing on any of your consciences.

“Whatever the DEP has regarding flood maps is exactly what you utilize? You don’t verify the validity of the flood map?” Anna Leone asked Dipple. (They supposedly verified the less important MLS data, but they don’t feel the need to verify the flood map?)  “It’s very clear in the flood hazard area regulations that if a state study regulatory map exists, you have to use it,” Dipple answered.

“If the DEP has erroneous information, you would base your analysis on whatever the DEP has?” Anna asked. “So for example if the DEP has…1+1 = 10 you’re basing an analysis on erroneous information because the DEP has that on its map. Wouldn’t  you be best serving not just yourself but also the applicant by bringing out the information that is erroneous?”

“This is the flood hazard area map, this is produced in 1980…,” Dipple said. “This study has existed as a regulatory flood map for the Hackensack River for 30-some years. It is the map that I am required to use for my analysis…” (Somebody help us, we are getting nowhere fast!)

“Just because developers utilize an archaic map doesn’t mean that it’s correct,” Anna told Dipple. “In the accounting world we say it’s your fiduciary duty to bring something up if it is incorrect. I would imagine that in the world of engineering, if something is flawed, it would be a duty to bring that up or to do the ethical thing.”

“I don’t feel that the map is wrong,” Dipple said.  (Well then Mr. Dipple…let’s start with the basics.  Do you know the difference between right and wrong?)

I can’t tell you HOW GREAT IT FELT when Zoning Board Attorney Sproviero finally asked Dipple,
“Do areas that fall outside a flood delineation map such as this one…are those areas outside the flood area subject to flooding under the right circumstances?”

“Yes, they could be,” Dipple answered.

“So the map in and of itself is not necessarily determinative of whether or not the property would be subject to flood events?” Sproviero asked.

And Dipple said, “It’s possible.”

Oh Lord, Hallelujah…what a relief.  Thank you Mr. Sproviero. That indeed was a Perry Mason moment for me. You finally got him to admit that the map doesn’t wear the pants in this town. Reality does.

It feels as if Dipple has been coached to refer to the “regulations he is required to follow” when he is asked questions that may reveal the downside to this project. I think everyone in the room knows the downside -- because it’s so blatantly obvious -- but it’s rough going getting straight answers out of these Hekemian EXPERTS.

If Dipple doesn’t believe he would be contributing to the flooding, then why is he working so hard to avoid acknowledging that the site floods?  Why doesn’t he just say, “Yes, I’m aware that the site floods, I’ve seen photographs.  However, I have engineered the site to contain all of that flood water, so that it won’t contribute to the flooding in any way.”  Instead, just like all the other witnesses before him, he speaks out of two sides of his mouth.

There is so much bologna being produced by the Hekemian witnesses that we can open up a deli. It’s a waste of the Board’s and the people’s time. But we are being targeted by the Hekemian empire and that leaves us no choice but to battle it out.

Some really awesome questions are being asked, and the residents are getting more skilled at asking them. They’re speaking hypothetically; they’re presenting facts in the form of questions, and they’re holding their ground -- not letting themselves be baffled by the run-around Dipple is giving them. I love it when Dipple gives his repetitive “rules-and-regulations” answer and a resident says, “Yes, but you have not answered the question.”  (Nice try. Give it another shot there, junior.)

Enlightening Discoveries

• This project will take approximately “two years to complete start-to-finish, from break-ground to opening-the-doors.”
• They are planning to imperviously cover approximately 9 acres, about 4 ½ acres of which will be asphalt.
• The detention basins, also called catch basins, are actually depressed areas of grass (not tanks as I had imagined).
• The four-story apartment eye-sore is only about 80 feet from the high school (check this website to get a rough idea of how little that is and imagine that the man holding the 100-foot sign is a 4-story apartment complex with a multi-level parking garage: http://www.prisonpolicy.org/zones/thousand_feet.html)
• Though the berms on the UW property protect their site, they are not their berms.
• With no variances this project would be approximately 50 single-family residential units.
• 70% of flood claims made to national flood insurance are made by residents who don’t live in a regulatory flood zone (a statistic provided by Michael Kirk, Oradell)

---------------------------------------------------

According to the April 19^th 2012 special meeting minutes, Dipple said 261 trees would be removed, and “450 to 500 trees” would be planted “back into the site.”  At this meeting, he said 177 trees total would be planted back into the site. So which is it?  Also, is it possible that the acres they’re planning to clear really only have  261 trees on them?

When Oradell resident Tomasina Schwartz asked Dipple, “What are some of the most recent projects that you have completed that are adjacent to a flood zone in a flood fringe or in a hazard zone.” He said, “I did particularly the 2 large developments…in Englewood: the Brownstones and the Sheffield…the entire properties are within the flood fringe.”  I googled them -- both are Hekemian projects. It appears as if Dipple and Hekemian have been acquainted for some time now. 

When Ulises Cabrera asked Dipple if he agreed that “overdevelopment is a cause of a lot of the recent floodings that we’ve had,” Dipple said:  “I think that overdevelopment in the past has definitely contributed to it, but we’ve enacted laws that prevent further exacerbation of those flooding issues. 

YET…boldly spitting in the face of that logic, they stand before the New Milford Zoning Board seeking at least 5 variances, which essentially means they are asking to break 5 rules. They want to exceed the maximum building height from the permitted 2 ½ stories to 4 stories. They want to exceed the maximum building coverage from the permitted 18% to 30.53%. They want to exceed the maximum impervious coverage from the permitted 58% to 70.37%.  They want to exceed the maximum number of families per building from the permitted 1, to 221. And they want to provide 99 less parking spaces than is permitted ().

Because zoning variances may infringe on the rights of neighbors, an applicant is not entitled to a variance. An applicant must meet specific criteria contained in State Laws (Municipal Land Use Laws) by satisfying specific legal standards of proof. This burden of proof is placed upon the applicant to demonstrate the requested relief is justified without impinging upon the rights of neighbors. http://www.wyckoff-nj.com/zoning.html

It’s no different than the hypocrisy of United Water representatives claiming overdevelopment caused the horrendous flooding New Milford experienced, then entering into a contract with Hekemian -- an overdeveloper of monumental proportions.

---------------------------------------------------

I have to give the New Milford Zoning Board a TREMENDOUS amount of credit: Frank Appice, Engineer Margita Batistic, Joseph Binetti, Eileen DeBari, Lou Denis, Planner Paul Grygiel, Joe Loonam, Secretary Maureen Oppelaar, Peter Rebsch, Attorney Scott Sproviero, and Ronald Stokes. WE CANNOT TAKE FOR GRANTED THEIR GENEROSITY IN DONATING THEIR TIME, AND DOUBLING UP ON THEIR MEETINGS IN ORDER TO SERVE THE RESIDENTS OF NEW MILFORD. Most of them are not getting paid for this service, and a simple thanks is hardly enough.

This has to be one of the largest and most critical applications in New Milford’s history. It has the potential to change the character of our hometown, and to affect the lives of its residents -- especially the young and innocent NM High School students who will be a mere 80 feet from 100’s of unknown elements (not to mention being new drivers faced with complicated traffic situations). The members of this Board are obviously taking this application seriously, asking intelligent questions, and being very patient with the residents as they struggle through the arduous questioning process.

At the end of the evening, DelVecchio complained that the New Milford residents are asking repetitive questions. “There are no time limits or duplication of questions being imposed,” he said to the Zoning Board. “If that is going to be the practice of the Board, we can’t allow the free dialogue without limits.” Now he’s asking the Board to schedule two SPECIAL meetings a month, in addition to the regular meeting. It’s mean, and spiteful, and manipulative, and wicked if you ask me.

Number one, Mr. DelVechhio, you are not making your transcripts available like other applicants have done, so we don’t have the benefit of reviewing and refreshing before attending these meetings.

Number two, you are juggling the witnesses, possibly to keep us off guard. This is creating major time lapses between testimonies, causing people to need refreshers.

Number three, many of the residents are new or coming in mid-meeting and don’t know what has been previously asked, which is the nature of Zoning Board meetings. People are not required to be there from the beginning to the end in order to participate. They come when they become aware of an issue and are motivated to attend a meeting.

Number four, the residents are asking different questions for the most part, but your EXPERT witness is repeating the same frustratingly deficient answers.

Number five, if you would instruct your witnesses to be more straightforward with their answers, the residents wouldn’t have to waste precious hours of their lives trying to pry the facts out of them.  It’s hard not to ask a question a second time when you hear a cockamamie answer that doesn’t make any sense. Do you think any of us really WANT to be here. You have thrust this upon us and we are now forced to defend our hometown from the threat you pose.

Number six, we endured Kinsey.  You didn’t put any limits on his babbling monologue. I got a stress hickey from that lively testimony.

Number seven, allow New Milford residents some latitude please. Many of them are traumatized. Many of them stand to lose more yet -- as we all do as a community from this overdevelopment. If they are being asked to endure TWO YEARS of “typical construction noise,” followed by all the subtle, and sometimes not so subtle HORRORS that come from replacing their soothing, natural, nurturing green space with asphalt, concrete and the cacophony of noise and activity generated by an enormous supermarket/apartment complex, then each of your witnesses can endure a couple of days of questioning.

And number eight, This is an ENORMOUS thing that you are asking of the community. Your own expert in land evaluation testified that he can’t find its match. Don’t expect us to make it easy on your witnesses who come in here and lie to us about how this abomination will not impact us.

As Peggy Saslow, a New Milford icon and my homeroom teacher in high school, said so beautifully to Mr. Dipple, “I am sorry you are being subjected to hostile questioning, but obviously you understand we are here because we are very unhappy about what is happening.”

This evening’s bravehearts were:  John DeSantis, Michael Kirk – Oradell, John Rutledge, Miriam Pickett, Betty Verdejo, Terry Limaxes, Anna Leone, Brian Confino – Oradell, Tomasina Schwartz – Oradell, Peggy Saslow, Ulises Cabrera, Henry Keough, Barbara Monahan, Sharon Hillmer. Namaste!!!

* * *

It’s Wednesday, December 23^rd, 2020. Half day of school today, and the dismissal bell just rang. Kids are pouring out of the building with smiles on their faces. Yay!  Winter break is here, and Christmas is two days away!!  OMG, look, there’s a fire in the apartment complex! The town’s fire horn is going off. Sirens are approaching quickly. Here comes the fire trucks.  Uh oh, they can’t get gain access to the road. It’s a one-way street and kids are scrambling to move their cars, and to get out of the road -- ice and snow everywhere.  Traffic is crazy because cars are flowing in and out of the Super ShopRite, cars are parked illegally, and everything is happening at once.  Oh no, a 9^th grader just got hit! Help her!  Someone please…

* * *

We don’t know their names yet, but be assured there will be casualties if this thing comes to fruition. 

To be continued...

p.s.  Dipple will be returning for more, possibly at the next meeting, August 14th at 7:30 p.m.

p.s.s.  Thank you Ann Piccirillo for your awesome coverage of this major issue.

p.s.s.s.  Keep up the beautiful work SOD! You are making a real difference.

p.s.s.s.s.  I am wondering why our town engineer is not asking any questions. Isn’t this her time to shine?

p.s.s.s.s.s.  Thanks a lot Suez/United Water for sticking it to us!