March 5, 2014

a total of twenty-one (21) parking spaces; install two (2) trees for every seven (7) parking spaces; 11. Relocate two (2) parking spaces to the rear of building; 12. Install directional signs in the area of the drive-thru isle subject to approval of Township Engineer; 13. Install light-colored roof; 14. Agree to meet all recommendations as listed in Township Consulting Engineer Memo dated January 10, 2014 and Acting Township Planner’s Memorandum dated January 17, 2014; COND MWh AAPLANNING. BRD\WPWINUTES(201 4\3-5-14 Minutes.doc 6

15. All conditions to be listed on final site plans. The Board voted on the Application as follows: Motion: Vice Chairman Weston Second: Dr. Bagoff Bagoff: Yes Carlucci: Absent Eben: Yes Ghebremicael: Yes Gurland: Absent Klein: Absent Lester: Absent McCartney: Yes Weston: Yes Wilkes: Yes Heller: Yes Chairman Heller announced a brief recess at approximately 8:52 P.M. Mr. Russo left the meeting at approximately 8:53 P.M. Chairman Heller reconvened the meeting at approximately 9:02 P.M. PB-13-26C/County of Essex/South Mountain Recreation Complex Block: 162; Lot: 2; Zone: R-1 1 Cherry Lane Courtesy Review Application to install nautical themed playground near pavilion/boat launch area and a dog park near existing pump station. EXHIBITS A-1- Preliminary Conceptual Plan of the Orange Reservoir Improvements prepared by French & Parrello Associates; A-2— Preliminary Conceptual Plan of Playground prepared by French & Parrello Associates dated December 5, 2013; A-3— Preliminary Conceptual Plan of Dog Park prepared by French & Parrello Associates dated December 5. 2013. DISCUSSION Mark L. Fleder, Esq., Conneil Foley LLP, Special Legal Counsel for Essex County, introduced the Application, a courtesy review for a new playground and dog park. Michael J. Piga, LLA, French & Parrello Associates, PA and Sangeev Varghese, Director, Essex County Department of Public Works, were sworn in an accepted by the Board to be expert witnesses. Mr. Piga said the County was proposing a new playground and dog park. Referring to Exhibit A-1; he described the area where the projects would be located. Referring to Exhibit A-2, he described the children’s playground including theme, age groups, equipment, surface materials, fence heights and material, seating, and landscaping details. He noted that approximately 65 trees would be removed and replaced with 76 trees — a combination of evergreen and deciduous species. No new lighting was proposed for the area; no new parking area was proposed; no new restroom facilities were proposed. Parking for playground access would be available near McLoone’s; the Zoo or the existing parking area near the nautical pavilion. Referring Exhibit A-3; he gave an overview of the dog park project to be located at the southern most part of ihe reservoir. He described the dog park features including exercise equipment, surface materials to include a

3; he gave an overview of the dog park project to be located at the southern most part of ihe reservoir. He described the dog park features including exercise equipment, surface materials to include a special synthetic turf specifically designed for use in dog parks, fencing heights and material, and landscaping details. There would be an access driveway for maintenance vehicles only. Parking for access to the dog park would be available at either the NAPLANNING. BRO\WPAMINUTES\2014\3-5-14 Minutes.doc 7

nautical pavilion area or Tulip Springs, a distance of about sixty feet through a wooded trail. No new restroom facilities were proposed. Approximately 40 trees would be removed, mostly white pines in poor condition; to be replaced with 80 new trees both evergreen and deciduous. Council President McCartney voiced concern about the number of trees to be removed. She asked Mr. Piga about access to the playground, the path from the pavilion to the playground and if the playground equipment would be marked for age appropriateness; Mr. Piga described how visitors would gain access and confirmed the equipment would be marked. Dr. Bagoff asked what was the total surface perimeter of the project, the height of the fences, hours of operation, and if security cameras were fo be installed. Mr. Piga said it was the perimeter was .65 acres; the fence would be 6 ft. high near the roadway; 4 ft. at playground perimeter. Mr. Fleder said operations questions were for Mr. Varghese; he indicated no security cameras were planned. Chairman Heller asked if trees to the west of the playground would remain to act as a buffer, regarding construction access — how many trees would be removed, and how did the drainage system currently work. Mr. Piga said the trees to the west would remain, approximately one or two trees would be removed for construction access, and there were under drains that channeled to the reservoir. Mr. Weston asked what was the depth of the buffer of existing trees from Cherry Lane to the dog park; what was the reasoning for creating a destination dog park in this area of the reservation where people were already bringing dogs; had an evaluation been done regarding the impact of a dog park on other wildlife native to the reservation; and would there be any new lighting. Mr. Piga said the buffer between the dog park and Cherry Lane was approximately 50 ft. and would including new landscaping; the dog park was considered a destination spot as part of the overall 1.75 miles reservoir path attraction; no study had been done regarding impact on wildlife; no new lighting was proposed. Mr. Heller asked Mr. Piga to estimate the life expectancy of the white pine groves in the area; Mr. Piga said the trees were mature but in disrepair. He opined there would be a benefit in cleaning out the area and planting more understory trees. Mr. Wilkes inquired as to the maximum

n the area; Mr. Piga said the trees were mature but in disrepair. He opined there would be a benefit in cleaning out the area and planting more understory trees. Mr. Wilkes inquired as to the maximum height of the fence, the buffer distance between the fence and reservoir for both projects, and the fence material. Mr. Piga said the maximum fence height was 6 ft., the buffer area was approximately 25 ft, and the fence would be black polyvinyl chain link. Mr. Eben inquired if the County had applied to Hudson Essex Passaic Soil Conservation District ({HEPSCD) regarding the playground drainage. He asked if Mr. Piga knew that West Orange had a tree ordinance; he did not see a tree removal plan as part of the Application. He asked where would visitors park to access the playground, and how had the parking been parking calculated. He stated that more people would be using the playground but there would be no additional restroom facilities; did Mr. Piga think that was a problem. He asked if the County had a major master plan; it appeared they came back before the Board every three months. Mr. Piga said the County had applied to HEPSCD, the tree removal plan would be submitted to the Building Department as part of its building construction plan; he said he believed there was adequate parking areas, and if the County deemed it necessary, they would supply additional restroom facilities. Mr. Piga said he was unable to answer inquiry regarding a master plan. Regarding the dog park, Mr. Eben stated there was not a tree removal plan, and no additional parking plan. He opined that there was already a dog park on South Orange Avenue; he did not WNAPLANNING.BRDWWPIMINUTESI201413-5-14 Minutes.doc 8

understand the reason for an additional dog park. Mr. Fleder said that Mr. Varghese would be able to answer why the County was proposing another dog park. There were no questions for Mr. Piga from Mr. Grygiel or the Public Advocate. Robert Rashkes, 35 Oakcrest Road, asked if the playgrouind equipment would be visible from Cherry Lane. Mr. Piga said the equipment would initially be visible, but less so when the landscape screening matured. Mr. Varghese told the Board the area had lost more than 100 trees during Hurricane Sandy; the County would be planting 1,000 new trees over the next year. Responding to questions from Mr. Fleder, Mr. Varghese stated no road closures on Cherry Lane were expected during the construction phase; the reservation was open from 6:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. - the playground and dog park facilities would be open to the public from sunrise to sunset; there were currently no plans for security cameras; the area was patrolled by the Essex County Sheriff's Office; the park was maintained by the Essex County Department of Parks and Recreation. In response to Mr. Eben’s question, Mr. Varghese said there was a demand from the Public for an additional dog park. Chairman Heller asked if the dog park was a passive recreational facility. Mr. Varghese opined that as part of the 1.75 miles reservoir area; visitors with their dogs could stop and rest in the dog park; he did consider it a passive area. Mr. Eben asked if the County had a master plan for the continued development of the Reservation, and why had construction stopped on the Education Center. Mr. Varghese said the County would be coming back before the Board for a new parking garage. Education Center construction had stopped due to weather; it would be finished by July 1, 2014. Mr. Grygiel asked Mr. Varghese to reconcile why there was no lighting planned for a dog park that would be open until 10 P.M. Mr. Varghese said there was adequate lighting all around the reservoir pathway. Mr. Piga said the dog park would be open only from dawn until dusk. Mr. Heller asked about security call boxes; Mr. Varghese said the County was considering the suggestion. Mr. Ghebremicael asked if the County was considering installing security cameras as discussed during the last Application hearing. Mr. Varghese said the County was considering the suggestion. Mr, Eben asked if there would be better

unty was considering installing security cameras as discussed during the last Application hearing. Mr. Varghese said the County was considering the suggestion. Mr, Eben asked if there would be better directional signage for access to the park. He said Council President McCartney had asked for better signage on numerous occasions. Mr. Varghese said the Board and Township Engineer submit to him exactly what type of signage should be installed. Council President McCartney said she was concerned about tree removal for a dog park. Referring to Exhibit A-3, she noted there were already cleared areas; she asked if any of those areas had been considered instead. Mr. Varghese said the cleared areas were going to have new trees planted as part of the overall 1,000 new trees. Council President McCartney said the site across the street from the proposed dog park was already cleared; she opined it would be better than taking down more trees. Andrew Joyce, 104 Walker Road, West Orange, stated he was a Board member of the South Mountain Conservancy. He asked where was a master plan for the Reservation; how would WNAPLANNING. BRO\WP\MINUTES\2014\3-5-14 Minutes.doc 9

bulldozers access the site. Mr. Varghese said there was no other plan for the area other than planting trees; there was already an access road for construction. Harvey Grossman, Esq., Public Advocate, inquired what the Master Plan of the County was for the Reservation in its entirety. He opined that continued development would forever alter the natural beauty of the area. Mr. Fleder said that any questions regarding the County's Master Plan for the Reservation should be directed to the County; it was not an appropriate question for the Courtesy Review Application; however, he would take Mr. Grossman's concern to the County. Mr. Grossman stated that due to increased traffic, there was a problem at Cherry Lane and Northfield Avenue; he asked if Mr. Varghese thought there was adequate signage, would a traffic control device or a traffic officer be a better remedy. Mr. Varghese said he would work with the Township professionals regarding signage needs. Mr. Fleder said traffic questions were not part of the testimony; however, he would advise the County regarding traffic concerns. Mr. Grossman asked if there were adequate bathroom facilities; Mr. Varghese answered in the affirmative. Dr. Bagoff asked if there was a method to determine the number of bathrooms required to accommodate visitors; Mr. Varghese identified the locations of existing facilities; he stated additional portable facilities would be available if there were special events. Robert Rashkes, 35 Oakcrest Road, asked if there would be signage for the dog park and playground parking and where those signs would be located; he asked in what Town the Tulip Springs parking lot ended, would dogs visiting the dog park be subject to the West Orange Dog Ordinance. Mr. Varghese said signs for dog park parking would be in Tulip Springs; he said Tulip Springs parking lot was in West Orange; Mr. Fleder said he was unsure if dogs would be subject to the West Orange dog ordinance. Mr. Grygiel said the State ordinance superseded West Orange ordinance. Sylvia Owens, 6 Korwel Court, asked why the Application was being heard. Mr. Fleder said that was not an appropriate question for Mr. Varghese. Chairman Heller advised Ms. Owens could come back to the podium for public comment. Members of the Public commented on the Application. Tricia Zimic, 9 Fairview Terrace, Maplewood, NJ Robert Rashkes, 35 Oakcrest Road,

ised Ms. Owens could come back to the podium for public comment. Members of the Public commented on the Application. Tricia Zimic, 9 Fairview Terrace, Maplewood, NJ Robert Rashkes, 35 Oakcrest Road, West Orange, NU Michele Sutton, 33 Oakcrest Road, West Orange, NJ Katelin Gordon, 211 Park Place, Orange, NJ Andrew Joyce, 104 Walker Road, West Orange, NJ Jennifer Duckworth, 82 Linden Street, Millburn, NJ Harvey Grossman, Public Advocate, advised the Board he was opposed to the Application and requested the Board send a strong message to the County that enough was enough. He opined there was an inherit conflict between the Township and the County; no safety controls or proper policing, congestion had been dumped into the most important part of the Town. The Township had a right to know what the grand plan for the reservation was before it was irreparably transformed and destroyed. Mr. Weston opined he was not a fan of the dog park; he did support any further expansion in to the historic portion of the park; he hoped the County would take all comments in to consideration. NAPLANNING. BRDIWPIMINUTESI2014\3-5-14 Minutes.doc 10

Council President McCartney opined the Board had listened to the Public’s concerns; particularly the request for a Master Plan. She wished the project were a bifurcated application; she liked the suggestion of the dog park at a different location; she voiced concern about traffic on Northfield Avenue. Mr. Eben opined that the people of Essex County were concerned about what was going on in the Park; he did not understand why the dog park was attached to the playground project. He did not believe the County proved there was a need for a new dog park. He said he could not support the project. Chairman Mr. Heller stated the Application was for courtesy review; he said the County did take Board recommendations in to consideration; he said he appreciated environmental constraints and chalienges. Recommendations: 1. Consider emergency call stations; 2. Consider better directional signage on Northfield Avenue 3. Consider relocating the dog park to an area across Cherry Lane that has fewer trees. The Board voied on the Application as follows: Motion: Chairman Heller Second: Dr. Bagoff Bagoff: Yes Carlucci: Absent Eben: No Ghebremicael: Yes Gurland: Absent Klein: Absent Lester: Absent McCartney: Yes Weston: Yes Wilkes: Yes Heller: Yes BOARD DISCUSSION Technical Review Subcommittee Ordinance and Application Process. Chairman Heller announced the discussion would be carried to the April 2, 2014 regular meeting. Mr. Eben said he had requested the Township Professionals be present for the discussion, including the Zoning Officer. Chairman Heller said that when the Board discussed the issues and has specific questions, he would submit the questions to the Town professionals to answer in writing. MEETING ADJOURNED at approximately 10:55 P.M. Minutes adopted May 7, 2014 =S—. Robin Miller, Planning Board Secretary Township of West Orange **THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING BOARD WILL BE WEDNESDAY JUNE 4, 2014 AT 7:30 P.M. IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS* NVAPLANNING.BRDAWP\MINUTES|2014\3-5-14 Minutes.doc 41