March 4, 2015

Mr. Piga confirmed that the pedestrian walkway was 15-feet wide and would be able to accommodate an emergency vehicle. Referring to Exhibit A-1, Councilwoman McCartney stated the new parking deck and educational building were not included on the aerial view; she asked Mr. Piga for clarification regarding the location of the Complex’s driveway to the new exhibit. She then asked for clarification regarding the giraffe fencing; Mr. Piga said that while the giraffes were unable to step over 4-foot fence, they were able to lean a great distance, hence the need for the 10-feet barrier fencing. He said that in addition to the giraffes, the exhibit would include small African deer, antelope and ostriches. Vice Chairman Weston stated there were no lighting details indicated on the plans; would the lighting be cut-off type; Mr. Piga said that post lights, 18-feet maximum with arches would be installed; the lamps would continue the rustic, African theme. In response to the Vice Chairman’s inquiry regarding area slope and drainage, Mr. Piga said the plan would meet all water quality standards for New Jersey. Mr. Lepore requested clarification of the condition and species of the 150 trees chosen for removal; Mr. Piga said the trees were a mixture of both healthy and dead/dying Oak and Ash. Harvey Grossman, Esq., Public Advocate, referring to Exhibit A-1, he asked Mr. Piga to indicate the locations of the new playground, new parking area, and Cherry Lane. He asked how many live giraffes would be at the exhibit; the surface area it would cover; would the exhibit be a major attraction; would the exhibit increase the number of visitors at the zoo; would there be an increase in traffic on Northfield Avenue; and a traffic study been conducted. Mr. Piga said there would be three giraffes; the exhibit would cover approximately 2 % acres; he opined it would become a major attraction resulting in more visitors; he did not know if there would be an increase in traffic or ifa traffic study had been conducted. Robert Rashkes, 35 Oakcrest Road, asked the species of trees to be replanted; would the giraffe exhibit be visible from the perspective of Oakcrest Road. Mr. Piga said a variety tree species including red maple and river birch were to be planted; he was unable to determine extent of exhibit visibility from Oakcrest Road. The Public had no further questions for Mr.

a variety tree species including red maple and river birch were to be planted; he was unable to determine extent of exhibit visibility from Oakcrest Road. The Public had no further questions for Mr. Piga. Lorrie Sciabarasi, AIA, Comito Associates, PC, was sworn in, stated her credentials, and accepted by the Board to be an expert in architecture. Ms. Sciabarasi said the County commissioned Comito Associates to design the giraffe house; referring to Exhibit A-4, she said the ground floor of the structure was approximately 7,000 square feet; she described the locations of animal stalls, exercise arena, keeper office, restroom, kitchen, mechanical/utilities, animal equipment and food storage, and building ingress/egress. Two sets of stairs led to Mezzanine area approximately 1,600 square feet (Exhibit A-5), its purpose for tamer access io the giraffes during indoor periods. The building elevations details (Exhibit A-6) included the height of the building to be approximately 50 feet; south elevation to include several window installations to allow as much natural light as possible; windows to be installed on north, west and east elevations. Ms. Sciabarasi said that Exhibit A-7 depicted the building exterior; the north side was the service side; the south side was the main exhibit where the animals would enter and exit the building to the viewing area. Building material details were to be finalized but to include a cultured stonewall facade to 10 feet height and other

natural materials including wood siding, a natural wood or thatched roof. Mr. Klein asked if solar panels or LEED type product(s) were included in the design to make the building more energy efficient; Ms. Sciabarasi stated it would be an efficient building including radiant floor heating to keep energy costs low; the ventilation system for circulation; the amount of windows; and photocell lighting. In response to inquiries from Vice Chairman Weston, Ms. Sciabarasi confirmed the building would be not be open to the general Public; she clarified that exterior lights would be installed in the area of the man doors. She said that floodlights and a generator would also be installed for use in case of emergency. Mr. Grygiel stated at Technical Review there was mention that during the period the giraffes were indoor, the possibility of using a live webcam feed to a large screen monitor inside the café was an element under consideration; Ms. Sciabarasi confirmed a webcam was under consideration. The Municipal Engineer and Public Advocate had no questions for Ms. Sciabarasi. Robert Rashkes, 35 Oakcrest Road, asked what direction the building windows faced, (Exhibit A-7); Ms. Sciabarasi said the windows faced south. There were no further questions or comments from the Public. The Board deliberated on the Application. The Board voted on the Application as follows: Motion: Vice Chairman Weston Second: Dr. Bagoff Bagoff: Yes Carlucci: Absent | Eben: Absent | Ghebremicael: Yes Gurland: Absent | Klein: Yes Lester: Absent | McCartney: Yes Weston: Yes Wilkes: Yes Heller: Absent PB-15-03C/County of Essex/TBZ/Café Renovation Block: 163; Lot: 1; Zone: R-1 560 Northfield Avenue Courtesy Review Application for renovations to existing café. EXHIBITS A-1: Aerial View Zoo Café Location, New Parking Deck, Giraffe Barn, prepared by Comito Associates, PC, undated. A-2: Zoo Cafe Renovations and Addition Title Sheet, Sheet T-1, prepared by Comito Associates, PC, dated 1/19/2015; A-3: Topographic Mapping of 560 Northfield Avenue, prepared by Pronesti Surveying, Inc., dated 8/5/2014; A-4: — Zoo Café Site Plan, Sheet SP-1, prepared by Comito Associates PC, dated 3/4/2015; A-5: Zoo Café Ground Floor Plan, Sheet SK-1, prepared by Comito Associates PC, dated 3/4/2015;

A-6: — Zoo Café Second Floor Plan, Sheet SK-2, prepared by Comito Associates PC, dated 3/4/2015; A-7: Zoo Café Rear Elevation ~ North, prepared by Comito Associates PC, dated 3/4/2015; A-8: Zoo Café Rear Elevation — West, prepared by Comito Associates PC, dated 3/4/15; A-9: Color Rendering — Zoo Cafe, prepared by Comito Associates PC, undated. DISCUSSION Mr. Fleder advised the Board that Comito Associates PC had also prepared the café renovation design plans; he asked Ms. Sciabarasi to describe the plan. Ms. Sciabarasi the café expansion incorporated the African Grasslands theme; she identified the location of the existing cafe (Exhibit A-1); described the existing conditions including the location of the existing kitchen area and the dining room area to be expanded (Exhibit A-3). Ms. Sciabarasi described the proposed renovations including the expansion of existing patio area, repurposing the existing kitchen and equipment, reconfiguring the food court area with various self-serve stations offering more food options and cashier kiosks. Renovations to the rear of the café would include installing an elevator, new stairs, additional restrooms, and rectangular shaped dining area (Exhibit(s) A-4, A-5). The new second floor would be accessible by interior stair or elevator; the second floor would include more restrooms, a large outdoor terrace, patio seating, thatched roof covered seating areas, small bistro serving grilled fare, and two exterior stairs to exit second level (Exhibit(s) A-6, A-7, A-8). Referring to Exhibit A-9, Ms. Sciabarasi said design materials would include natural wood railing system, natural wood siding, substantial glass, thatched roofing, and a snake design element along the path where there was a change in grade. Ms. Sciabarasi concluded her testimony. Councilwoman McCartney asked what would be the total! number of seats in the café; and would there be any storm waiter disturbance as a result of the renovation. Ms. Sciabarasi said 120 seats on the first floor and 200 on the second floor; there would be no storm water disturbance, the amount would be under the threshold. Vice Chairman Weston questioned the height of the decorative signage pole; he asked if there were any fire safety concerns regarding the choice of thatched roof design for a kitchen facility, what type of roof material would be used. Ms. Sciabarasi said the

ive signage pole; he asked if there were any fire safety concerns regarding the choice of thatched roof design for a kitchen facility, what type of roof material would be used. Ms. Sciabarasi said the decorative pole would be approximately 55-feet high; the roof would be a synthetic material. Mr. Klein asked if Fire Department and Ambulance Squad would review site plan to determine if there was adequate emergency vehicle access. Ms. Sciabarasi said the renovation did not to disturb current vehicle access to the building; there was a service drive on the left side of the building for deliveries; and an additional access road for maintenance vehicles on the right side of the building. Mr. Grygiel advised the Board the Fire and Police Departments had obtained the plans for the Tech Review meeting (2/11/15) and had no comments. Harvey Grossman, Esq., Public Advocate, asked if the development of the café would adversely affect the surrounding area food establishments. Vice Chairman Weston stated the question was not relative to architecture. The Public had no questions for Ms. Scabarasi. Mr. Fleder advised the Board the County had concluded its presentation. Vice Chairman Weston asked if Public would like to comment prior to Board deliberation.

Robert Rashkes, 35 Oakcrest Road, stated that motorists visiting the South Mountain Complex continued having difficulty maneuvering access to the site; signage was bad; vehicles were still turning around on Aspen Road, an area on Northfield Avenue where there were no pedestrian sidewalks. Mr. Varghese was sworn in, he said that a result of the concerns voiced by the Board during recent previous applications, the County had hired a consultant to create easy-to-follow signage from the point when vehicles exit Route 280 and continue on to the Complex destination. He presented examples proposed signage; he said the consultant had completed approximately 80% of the project. All obsolete signage would be removed. He described the new traffic signal located at the point of exit for the new parking deck; it would be time-signalized with the existing lights. Councilwoman McCartney stated her continued concern has been motorists (unfamiliar to the area) traveling west Northfield Avenue did not have adequate directional signage nor ample time to correct lane error to access the necessary exit. Mr, Klein opined the temporary sandwich boards directing motorists where to park during summer months seemed adequate. Mr. Grygiel asked if the sign examples should be marked as exhibits; Vice Chairman Weston determined the not to enter the sign illustrations as an exhibit as they were not part of the original Application; he advised the Board reference to the signs part of the County Engineer testimony that the issue of traffic was addressed. The Board had no further questions for Mr. Varghese. Vice Chairman Weston noted the Applications were for Courtesy Review; he thanked and acknowledged the County for all the recent iree plantings along Cherry Lane. The Board voted on the Application as follows: Motion: Vice Chairman Weston Second: Dr. Bagoff Bagoff: Yes Carlucci: Absent- | Eben: Absent | Ghebremicael: Yes Gurland: Absent | Klein: Yes Lester: Absent | McCartney: Yes Weston: Yes Wilkes: Yes Heller: Absent MEETING ADJOURNED at approximately 9:20 P.M. Minutes adopted April 1, 2015. = Robin Miller, Planning Board Secretary Township of West Orange THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING BOARD WILL BE WEDNESDAY MAY 6, 2015 AT 7:30 P.M. IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10