August 7, 2013

Mr. Ghebremicael said he was concerned the Applicant would compromise the safety of the tenants by not installing a parking lot walkway; he inquired if a walkway could be installed and still meet the parking requirements. Mr. Sutherland said the plan could be looked at; a walkway might be installed if it did not interfere with the requirements. He said that there would be signage there was additional parking in the garage. Council President McCartney asked about the status of the remediation; with regard to the additionally thirty parking spaces in the Deco structure, how would people know there was additional parking. She said she was also concerned about pedestrian safety; would it be possible to create a paved walkway. She also asked about property maintenance on site with the change to rental units Dr. Bagoff said regarding the parking spaces; the goal of downtown redevelopment was to have spaces for the people who live. in the community to have available parking spaces. The plan was for one-hundred units, with one-hundred parking spaces in West Orange, with an additional thirty spaces in the garage in Orange. He opined that if the goal was to meet additional spaces for the community, then with the proposed plan the goal was not being met because tenants would use the overflow parking. There would be no public parking; people in the community living outside the development must have access to parking spaces. Dr. Bagoff opined that that the Applicant should maintain the waterway area in perpetuity. He said the lighting plan needed to reflect lighting levels; placement of foot-candles, and emergency call boxes; he recommended the West Orange Fire Department review the plan. He asked who would be responsible for the maintenance of the 1,400 shrubs; he stated the retention basin was not a stream, he asked if some sort of safety net could be installed in the case of a child in the area. Regarding the building’s roof, had a light roof been considered for heat island effect. Inquiring about the fence along the new daylighted waterway, Vice Chairman Weston asked if there was a way to provide an edge treatment. Mr. Sutherland said it was a gentle slape. Vice Chairman Weston voiced concern regarding the lack of a sidewalk along the parking area to the street and the front door Mr. Gurland inquired about the parking lot traffic pattern ingress and egress;

Chairman Weston voiced concern regarding the lack of a sidewalk along the parking area to the street and the front door Mr. Gurland inquired about the parking lot traffic pattern ingress and egress; Mr. Sutherland said there would be directional signage for one way in and one way out. Mr. Eben said the zoning ordinance required one tree for every ten parking spaces; he said he was concerned about the flooding along Central Avenue, Mitchell Street and South Jefferson Avenue. He stated the plan should include an emergency phone system. Mr. Sutherland said that opening the culvert would increase the volume, the water would not back up; it would help the area. Chairman Heller said he had many questions about the landscaping plan and architectural plan; he said the architectural plan did not match what was being presented; Mr. Sullivan said the new architect had been retained within the last year. Referring to the architectural Floor Pian Level 1, sheet A1.1, Chairman Heller said the plan being shown showed some sort of barrier; he opined that trees had a tendency to keep people on path. The plan being presented this night did not reflect the same landscaping; the plan needed to be revised; it should include screening along the two properties and he said he would like to see screening along parking spaces one through ten. NAPLANNING. BRD\WPWINUTESI2013\8-7-13 Minutes.doc 8