A tree that has stood in Maplewood since before the Revolutionary War will continue to stand at 62 Pierson Road for at least a little while longer, due to a decision by the Sustainable Maplewood Committee.
At the virtual meeting on August 3, township officials, including Mayor Vic De Luca and Township Committee member Nancy Adams, heard testimony and decided not to grant an appeal to a developer to remove the 271-year-old London plane tree at 62 Pierson Road.
“This gets the award for the most people ever coming to one of our [Sustainable Maplewood] hearings,” said De Luca.
Town arborist Rich Wolowicz, who examined the tree on July 23, said that the tree appeared healthy and was “one of the largest” trees in town and that he estimated its age at 271 years. Maplewood Dept. of Public Works Superintendent Mike Horan said he agreed with Wolowicz’s assessment. “It’s a large, healthy tree,” said Horan.
The tree in question at 62 Pierson Road in Maplewood, NJ. Photo by Chad Hunt.
“It’s a couple years older than our recent 250th anniversary of the country. I think that sort of gives it a historic nature,” said Wolowicz. “So I agreed with my associate in declining to remove the tree.”
Corey Klein, representing the developer Tony Nardone, owner of Property Maintenance Group LLC, said that the subdivision of 62 Pierson had been approved “as of right” and that that included removal of the tree. He said that the township had provided no legitimate basis to deny the removal of the tree and that the tree had not been previously designated as historic. “The designation of the tree as historic after the application … is improper … and unlawful,” said Klein, who promised to take further legal action should the committee deny the appeal.
Township Committee member Nancy Adams noted that the application for the subdivision did not include approval for the site plan — and said that the township was within its rights to deny the appeal.
“It’s still up to the [Public Works] director to decide whether or not a tree removal permit is granted,” said Adams. “There was no development approved for this yet,” she added. “Since there was no development approved, the Planning Board’s approval for a subdivision doesn’t mean the same thing as the development itself being approved. It just means the subdivision was approved.”
“I’m not compelled to say that we should reverse the denial of this permit,” Adams added. “I haven’t seen anything to say that something as magnificent as this tree, which was there, by the way, when the developer purchased the property, so consideration could have been given then as to whether or not he could do what he wants to do while keeping that tree intact.”
“You can build another house. You can’t plant another 271-year-old tree,” said another community member testifying at the meeting.
The large turnout for the meeting was mostly due to 62 Pierson’s neighbor Ellen Seidman, who has been posting extensively on local Facebook groups about the tree and created a petition to save the tree that has been signed by more than 1,600 local residents.
Seidman noted that the tree measures 72 inches in diameter and read an excerpt from a letter from New Jersey Big Tree Conservation Program administrator Forrest Jennings stating, “The current Champion London planetree on our registry is significantly smaller, 58″ (4.8′) in diameter and is in Plainfield, New Jersey. We previously did not know London planetrees in New Jersey could obtain the diameter you report, making this tree of exceptional historic and ecological significance.”
After the meeting, Seidman was relieved, but said there was more work to be done.
“The developer’s lawyer made it pretty clear at the hearing that he’ll sue so this story doesn’t yet have a definitive happy ending,” wrote Seidman. “But tonight, I’m grateful to live in a town that stands by its beautiful, old trees.”
