April 3, 2013

would not create a visual problem for passerbys. Mr. Piga said the Course did not impact the Lenape Trail. Chairman Bagoff asked if a material other than asphalt could be used on the access road. Mr. Piga said that asphalt would be best material. Mr. Weston said the conceptual plan for the Course showed much ground area; Mr. Piga said there would be plantings. Chairman Bagoff asked if the Public had any questions for Mr. Piga. Suzanne Robinson, 34 Dogwood Drive, asked Mr. Piga to confirm the Course would be designed for two different age groups. Mr. Piga answered in the affirmative. Robert Rashkes 35 Oak Crest Road, asked where the buses would be moved after drop off. Chairman Bagoff advised that Mr. Piga had not testified to administrative matters and suggested Mr. Rashkes hold the question until after additional witness testimony. Mr. Fleder introduced the County's next witness, Mark A. Coan, AIA, USA Architects Planners + Interior Designers. Mr. Coan stated his credentials; the Board accepted him to be an expert witness in architecture. Mr. Coan began his testimony with a PowerPoint presentation, (Exhibit A-2 - The Education Center, dated April 3, 2013). Mr. Coan said the Center ran in north-south direction, it would be setback from Northfield Avenue further than the Arena; given the substantial grade, there was the opportunity to build in to the slope. Mr. Coan described the proposed ticket area, educational classrooms, barrier free restrooms, animal holding areas, and the design of the second floor which would be organized along the west side of the building. Mr. Coan concluded his testimony. Referring to the first floor plan, Mr. Eben asked if there would be a slop sink; if the ticketing windows and interior desk area would be ADA compliant; and asked for confirmation that the proposed exterior retail space would be connected to the building but not accessible from the interior for bathroom accessibility. He also asked if the retail space and roof area would be handicap accessible. Mr. Coan advised that there would be a slop sink; the ticketing windows and interior desk areas would be ADA compliant; and the proposed retail space would be used seasonally, with no direct access to the interior of the building. He said access to the roof would be from the southeast corner; the only means of egress for a disable person. Mr. Heller asked if a Green

nally, with no direct access to the interior of the building. He said access to the roof would be from the southeast corner; the only means of egress for a disable person. Mr. Heller asked if a Green roof had been considered. Mr. Coan said it was not easy to get an organic edge. Mr. Weston asked if the plan had considered LEED certification. Mr. Coan said that LEED Certification would not be sought, however many elements had been incorporated in the design of the structure. Mr. Weston opined that certification would be good for the structure and the County; he suggested including as a condition of recommendation the County provide all aspects of sustainability in the design of the structure. NAPLANNING. BRD\WP\MINUTES|201314-3-13 Minutes.dec 8

Mr, Klein asked what was planned for the old (existing) Education Center. Mr. Fleder advised that question could be answered by Dr. Goodman, the Director of Turtle Back Zoo. Harvey Grossman, Public Advocate, asked where buses would be stored after drop off. Mr. Fleder advised the question could be answered by Dr. Goodman. Dr. Jeremy Goodman, Director of Turtle Back Zoo, was sworn in and accepted by Board to be an expert witness. Dr. Goodman testified that the buses would be parked in the existing lot on Cherry Lane; and the County was currently negotiating for additional parking across Northfield Avenue, opposite the Zoo. The existing Education Center would continue to be used for educational programs, birthday parties, and the summer camp program. Dr. Goodman stated that the issue of safety was a primary reason for the new Education Center; there would be a system of safety lights, and buses would no longer be idling in the parking lots. Mr. Grossman stated that the bus parking facility would be located on Cherry Lane; he opined that between thirty and forty buses would be in the reservation per day. He asked if the buses would be stored within or outside of the Reservation. Dr. Goodman said the buses would be stored within the Reservation. Dr. Bagoff advised Mr. Grossman that the storing of buses on Cherry Lane were part of a previously approved Application; there would be no additional black top paving in that area of the Reservation. Chairman Bagoff asked if the Public had any questions for Dr. Goodman. Robert Rashkes, 35 Oak Crest Road, stated he had counted sixty-four buses in the existing parking lot. He said the previous Application indicated that there might be ample space during the week, but the weekends would be a challenge. Dr. Goodman said he had never seen that number of buses in the lot. Chairman Bagoff reminded Mr. Rashkes that Dr. Goodman would not be answering questions to testimony from the previous Application. Chairman Bagoff indicated the Public could comment on the Application. Robert Rashkes, 35 Oak Crest Road, thanked Mr. Dwyer for his recommendation regarding public noticing. He recommended the County build a Green multi-tiered parking garage. He opined the County was not prepared to handle the traffic generated by the Zoo visitors; he was concerned that Northfield Avenue was an important route for emergency vehicles; the

ed parking garage. He opined the County was not prepared to handle the traffic generated by the Zoo visitors; he was concerned that Northfield Avenue was an important route for emergency vehicles; the increased traffic could create hazardous traffic backups. He requested the Education Center be put in a different location; he requested that members of the Public be included in planning future projects. Harvey Grossman, Public Advocate, thanked the County for their presentation. He opined that all the facilities were first-rate. However, the focus of the presentation was solely internal and did not take in to account the impact on West Orange as a whole. He said three neighborhoods were impacted in a detrimental manner; Dogwood, Olmsted and St. Cloud areas. He opined that as the County projects grew; it would remove the open space and forest, creating a negative impact on NAPLANNING. BRD\WP\MINUTES\2073\4-3-13 Minutes. doc 9

surrounding property values. {t was his opinion that the facility had reached critical mass; it should not be allowed to grow. He said he appreciated the Courtesy Review; but suggested that from the early planning stage, future projects be the collaboration between the County and the Township. The Board deliberated on the Application. Mr. Eben opined that Mr. Grossman had made valid points; he agreed that the County and Township should work together. He also stated he would like something done about the illegal banner signs along the perimeter fences. Mr. Ghebremicael opined that the County did a great job; he traveled Northfield Avenue several times a day and did not encounter traffic problems along the corridor. Councilwoman McCartney said she took exception to comments made by the Public Advocated; she said the County had worked with the Township every step of the way regarding the Applications. She advised the Board that a coalition of Aspen Road residents had contacted her; they were very concerned that people missing the turn to the Reservation were making hazardous turn-around(s) off Aspen Road; additionally the graffiti on the County footbridge should be cleaned up. Mr. Heller opined he looked at the projects from a detail perspective and the big picture. He said the Reservation trails were designed by the same person who designed Central Park. He opined the County did a fantastic job of enhancing the Olmsted vision. Mr. Weston said he also took exception to Public Advocate’s comments; the area was now better than it was several years ago; he said he supported the project; the project encompassed twenty acres out of an area of over two-thousand acres. Chairman Bagoff said the Board had the opportunity to say yes or no to the project; he said the County Executive has shown great interest in the project; he opined the project was a great opportunity for the education of children. He said he supported the Application; but noted there were traffic issues associated with the project Recommendations: 1. The Tree Top Adventure Course should maintain a 30 ft. setback from Northfield Avenue; 2. Within 30 days Applicant to provide Board with a list of all the sustainable design features incorporated in the project; 3. County should adopt a one-for-one tree removal/tree replacement policy for the project; 4. County should improve the “Left Turn / U

ll the sustainable design features incorporated in the project; 3. County should adopt a one-for-one tree removal/tree replacement policy for the project; 4. County should improve the “Left Turn / U Turn” signage on the westbound side of Northfield Avenue across from the Zoo to make it more visible. Chairman Bagoff called for a vote on the Application. NAPLANNING. BRD\WPIMINUTES\2013\4-3-13 Minuies.doc 10

The Board voted on the Application as follows: Motion: Chairman Bagoff Second: Mr. Ghebremicael Carlucci: - Eben: Y Ghebremicael: Y Gurland: Y Heller: Y Klein: Y Lester: - McCartney: Y Weston: Y Wilkes II: - Bagoff: Y APPLICATION PB-13-07/Village Supermarket Inc., d/b/a Shop Rite Block: 155.21; Lot: 40; Zone: P-C 1 Rooney Circle Preliminary and final site plan without variances to operate 24-hour business. EXHIBITS None DISCUSSION Joseph H. Alessi, Esq., attorney for the Applicant, told the Board the Applicant, Village Super Market Inc., was seeking to extend its operation to be opened twenty- four hours. As indicated in West Orange ordinance 4-9.1, the Applicant was to comply with the regulations of the West Orange Police Department; the Applicant was also required to have site plan approval, which had been granted several years ago. Enzo Pavese, AIA, The Pavese Group, P.A. was sworn in and accepted by the Board to be an expert witness in architecture. Mr. Pavese advised the Board he had designed the original project; he stated the site plan that was part of the current Application was the same as the original site plan. Mr. Eben opined that the original Langan Engineering site pian, in the easterly corner was there was confusion as to the way the parking spaces were laid out. Referencing the Overall Site Plan dated March 14, 2013; he asked Mr. Pavese how the parking was laid out because it appeared to show double parking. Mr. Pavese said the darker lines on the plan indicated what was currently on the site. The parking stalls were in an east-west pattern. Mr. Eben said he would like to see a cleaned-up site plan; he did not think the disabled parking was correctly indicated. Mr. Grygiel said that some items were not on the submitted site plan but that anything not shown on the current plan would be included in the plans submitted for subsequent Applications. Chairman Bagoff asked if the Application’s site plan was sufficient for the ordinance being discussed. Mr. Grygiel answered in the affirmative. Vito Altieri, General Store Manager, West Orange Shop Rite, was sworn in and accepted to be an expert witness. Mr. Altieri said the store wanted to move to a twenty-four hour operation for the convenience of the community. He gave a brief recapitulation of comments from Sergeant John Morella of the West Orange Police Department in his report dated

ove to a twenty-four hour operation for the convenience of the community. He gave a brief recapitulation of comments from Sergeant John Morella of the West Orange Police Department in his report dated March 13, 2013. Mr. Altieri discussed the outstanding issues, which included the amount of money permitted in the cash NAPLANNING.BRD\WPIMINUTES|2013\4-3-13 Minutes.doc 41

register; window signage; visibility of cash registers; the number of employees during overnight hours; burglarproof drop safes; the alarm system and camera monitoring. Mr. Alessi gave a recapitulation of three outstanding issues that the Applicant was requesting waivers (per Ordinance Section 4-9) including 4-9.1b 3 “each employee ...does not carry more than one hundred dollars cash on his or her person”. Due to the large volume of business each cashier starts with $100.00 in cash; 4-9.1 e “Any signs posted in the windows shall be located so as to provide a clear and unobstructed view of the cash register and interior sales area from the outside.” — Due to the large size and design of the building and the nature of the business operation each cash register and interior sales area cannot be visible from the outside. The Applicant will post the required signs; 4-9.1 f — “The interior sales area shall be designed and located so that the sales clerk and customer are fully visible from the street at the time of the sales transaction.” — Due to the large size and design of the building and the nature of the business operation the sales clerks and customers cannot be fully visible from the street at the time of the sales transaction. Councilwoman McCartney inquired if the Applicant complied with outdoor ordinance and fire code. Chairman Bagoff stated the Applicant should provide the Building Department with an internal footprint of the store within three months of Approval. Mr. Gurland inquired if the ATM machines were to be operational twenty-four hours. Mr. Altieri said an outside company, not Shop Rite, maintained the machines. He indicated the machines would be accessible. Mr. Heller asked if additional employees would be hired. Mr. Altieri said that current employees would have the option of working over-night hours. No new hires were planned. Chairman Bagoff polled the Board for the three requested waivers: Section 4-9.1b 3; 4-9.1 e; 4-9.1 f. The Board unanimously voted to grant the requested waivers. Conditions: 1. The Applicant shall comply with all applicable Township, County, State and Federal laws, ordinances, regulations and directives, including without limitation, obtaining ail applicable local, state and federal approvals and/or permits. Without limitation of the foregoing, prior to the signing of the approved site plans, and prior to the

g without limitation, obtaining ail applicable local, state and federal approvals and/or permits. Without limitation of the foregoing, prior to the signing of the approved site plans, and prior to the commencement of any land disturbance or construction, the Applicant shall submit to this Board, with a copy to the Board Engineer, proof that it has obtained all required governmental approvals. 2. If another governmental entity or agency grants a waiver or variance affecting the plans and/or exhibits submitted by the Applicant, this approval or the conditions attached to it, then the Applicant shall re-apply to this Board respecting the same and this Board shall have the right to view that issue as it relates to this approval and these conditions and modify and amend same, if appropriate. NAPLANNING.BRD\WP\MINUTES\2013\4-3-13 Minutes. doc 12