February 25, 2016

Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Marion if his testimony is a repeat of the testimony he presented at the January 28, 2016 meeting; he replied yes and continued to detail the floor plans of all of the units. Mr. Marion presented a colored rendering of the engineer drawing depicting the units that have basements, cellars or walk out basements that was pre-marked as Exhibit A-11 for identification. Mr. Williams said that Exhibit A-11 was prepared so that it is clear what units will have walk out basements. Mr. Marion detailed Exhibit A-11 noting that the green units have basements or cellars, the orange units have daylight basements which are partially exposed and have large windows and the pink units have walk out basements. He said that this is based on Mr. Lanzafama’s grading plan. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Marion if the daylight basement could also be a walkout basement; he replied no because the grade is higher than the floor. Mr. Marion continued to refer to Exhibit A-11 and noted all of the units that have walkout basement and the units that do not have walkout basements. Mr. Marion presented the rear elevations of the units that have walk out basements, which was pre-marked as Exhibit A-12 for identification, and began detailing it. Vice Chairman Buecher asked Mr. Marion if there is a difference in the basements because of the grade; he said yes. Vice Chairman Buechler asked Mr. Marion what the height of the buildings are according to the township ordinance; he said they vary from building to building because of the grade line. Mr. Williams stated that all of the buildings are under 35’ high and were measured in accordance to the Township ordinance. Vice Chairman Buechler asked Mr. Marion why the walkout basement units that have a door do not qualify as a three (3) story home; he said that based on the criteria according to the township’s ordinance they do not qualify as a three (3) story home.

Vice Chairman Buechler asked Mr. Grygiel if he agrees with Mr. Marion; he said that once he reviews the drawings during the break, he will answer that question. Mr. Williams asked Mr. Marion what the applicant was trying to achieve with the design of the townhouses being proposed; he said that they were designed for affluent empty nesters looking to downsize and remain living in the area so that they could live in a new home with little or no maintenance. Mr. Williams stated that at the last meeting, several members of the Board were concerned that the bonus room or the den could be made into a bedroom and he asked Mr. Marion to comment on that. Mr. Marion said that the reason there are bonus spaces on the second floor is because the first floor is designed to be open for entertaining. He said that the only private spaces in the house are on the second floor and, if the individual wants a study or an exercise room, the bonus spaces can be used for that. Mr. Marion said that these units are marketed for elderly empty nesters moving from a larger home and the basements were designed basically for storage and are sold as unfinished. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Marion what the total number of townhouse units being proposed are; he said thirty six (36). Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Marion if twenty seven (27) of the townhouses are three (3) bedroom units; he replied yes. Chairman Never asked Mr. Marion if his testimony is that the three (3) bedroom units were designed for individuals, who are empty nesters, wanting to downsize; he replied yes or individuals who have college aged children who may come back home to visit. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Marion if there was any marketing statistics or analysis that prove that this is an appropriate number of bedrooms for empty nesters; he said no. Mr. Quentzel asked Mr. Marion if the basement total sq. footage is included in the totals he gave the Board earlier; he said no. Mr. Quentzel asked Mr. Marion how high the ceilings were in the walkout basements; he said 8 % to 9 high.

Mr. Quentzel asked Mr. Marion what the sq. footage of all of the basements were; he said unit A which is the largest unit is approximately 1600 sq. feet but because of all the mechanical equipment you could not finish off the entire basement; only approximately % of that basement could be finished off. Mr. Marion said that unit B has approximately 750 sq. feet that could be finished off in those units and unit C would have approximately 600 or 700 sq. feet that you could finish off. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Marion if there was plumbing on all three floors; he said there is plumbing on two floors but he did not know if there was plumbing in the basement. Mr. Steinhart asked Mr. Marion what the elevations of the sanitary sewers are; he said Mr. Lanzafama could answer that question. Chairman Buechler asked Mr. Marion what the height of the basements with the walkout doors are; he said 8 % to 9’ high depending on the construction type. Vice Chairman Buechler said that they might have an issue if the units with walkout basements are three story, depending on what Mr. Grygiel determines, they may require an additional variance. Chairman Neuer said that they will get back to that issue once Mr. Grygiel makes a determination. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Lanzafama if he would like to answer Mr. Steinhart’s question; he replied yes. Chairman Neuer said that Mr. Lanzafama was sworn in at the last two meetings and he will continue under oath. Mr. Steinhart asked Mr. Lanzafama what the elevation of the sewer line above the basement floor is as it exits the foundation wall to the street; he said that it varies as you move around the site and twenty eight (28) units would be able to have sewer lines. 10

Mr. DarConte asked Mr. Marion what the size of the large basement windows would be and the distance from the top of the window to the ceiling of the basement; he said the windows would be set at the standard height of 7’ and about 2’ above the window to the ceiling. Mr. Keller asked Mr. Marion if all of the buildings are going to have basements or is there a question that some may not have basements; he said all buildings are intended to have basements unless they hit bedrock. Mr. Keller asked Mr. Marion if the mechanical equipment will be in the basements; he said that air handlers and the hot water heater will be in the basement and additional air handlers will be in the attics that service the second floor. Mr. Keller asked Mr. Marion if some of the units do not have a basement, what will happen to the mechanical equipment; he said that there are storage areas off of the garages that could accommodate the mechanical equipment. Mr. Keller asked Mr. Marion what building materials will be used in the area below the first floor in the rear of the buildings; he said typically concrete will be used. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Marion if concrete will be used in the area below the first floor on this site; he said yes. Mr. Quentzel asked Mr. Marion to describe the attic space and access to the attic; he said there is a code minimum and pull-out stairs are proposed for access to the attic. Mr. Marion said that the attic is constructed of wood trusses and it would be difficult to store anything in the attic. He said that you could stand in the middle of the attic but it would be difficult to walk around. Mr. Grygiel asked Mr. Marion what the exact height of the attic would be because the definition of a story, according to the township ordinance, is that the height has to be 7’ 6” or no more than 60% of the area. Mr. Marion stated there is no ceiling in the attics so there is no ceiling height. Mr. Grygiel said that there is a roof above the attic so there has to be a ceiling height. Mr. Marion said he would have to verify what the height would be. Chairman Neuer suggested that Mr. Grygiel and Mr. Marion review the plans to determine if the attic would be considered another story. 11

Mr. Grygiel and Mr. Marion agreed that the attic space does not appear to meet the criteria, per township ordinance, for another story. Mr. Grygiel referred to Exhibit A-11 and asked for clarification regarding how many buildings could potentially be considered three (3) story due to the walkout basement and it was determined there are three buildings in question. Mr. Grygiel asked Mr. Marion if the cellars will have windows in them; he replied no. There were no further questions for Mr. Marion from the Board Members of the Board Professionals. Cia Pak approached the podium and stated that he lives at 235 Mt. Pleasant Avenue. He asked Mr. Marion how many units have master bedrooms on the first floor; he replied nine (9) units. Mr. Pak asked Mr. Marion if he had any statistics to prove that the proposed townhouses are designed for empty nesters; he replied no, just anecdotal evidence. Mr. Pak asked Mr. Marion how safety will be provided when they are building the townhouses. Chairman Neuer stated that the Township’s Building Department approves the plans and everything has to be built to code. Kevin Malanga approached the podium and stated that he lives at 57 Ridge Road. He asked Mr. Marion what age range he considered affluent elderly empty nesters that the townhouses are being marketed for; he said that he does not have a number but it is families that have older children that are in the process of leaving. Mr. Marion said maybe he misspoke when he used the term elderly. Mr. Malanga asked Mr. Marion what income range he was referring to when he said that the townhouses were being marketed for “affluent” empty nesters; he said he does not know the price of the units so he cannot answer that. Mr. Malanga asked Mr. Marion if he was given a budget to design the townhouses for sale; he said he was designing them at his clients’ request and was not given a budget. Mr. Marion said it was not part of the program. 12

Mr. Malanga asked Mr. Marion if cost was no limit when he was asked to design the townhouses; he said it was not a concern. Frederick C. Biehl III, attorney for Michele Cestone, approached the podium and asked Mr. Marion how many of the units have walkout basements; he replied eleven (11). Rene Tiche approached the podium and stated that she lives at 10 Ridge Road. She asked Mr. Marion if they are talking about making the entire Ridge Road a public road. Chairman Neuer said that Mr. Marion did not testify to the street. Chairman Neuer explained to Ms. Tiche that the applicant is proposing a new roadway from Ridge Road to Prospect Avenue and that anything to the left of the new roadway would remain a private road. Durecia Watley approached the podium and stated that she lives at 18 Jones Place. She said she is concerned about the blasting and asked Mr. Marion if they will be blasting; he said that they are not anticipating blasting on the site. Mr. Marion said that Mr. Lanzafama testified to that. Chairman Neuer stated that their Engineer testified that they are not intending to blast and if they have to blast to put a basement in, then they will not put the basement in. Tal Ben-Zvi approached the podium and stated that he lives at 5 Allsop Court. He asked Mr. Marion how many people they anticipate living in the thirty six (36) townhouses; he said approximately one hundred and fifty (15) people. Mr. Ben-Zvi asked Mr. Marion what he based this number on; he said four (4) occupants per unit. Mr. Ben-Zvi asked Mr. Marion if they surveyed all townhouses in West Orange to come up with this number; he said no. Mr. Ben-Zvi asked Mr. Marion if he should have surveyed all townhouses instead of making up a number on the spot; he said that Planners are better suited to testify about the demographics of West Orange. 13

Mr. Ben-Zvi asked Mr. Marion what study he based his testimony on regarding elders wanting to stay in town; he said there was no study. Mr. Marion said his testimony was based on just anecdotal evidence. Mr. Ben-Zvi asked Mr. Marion if he was aware that the census between 2000 and 2010 showed there were less people aged 65 and older living in West Orange; he replied no. Mr. Ben-Zvi asked Mr. Marion what the definition of a bonus space is according to the Township ordinance; he said that there is nothing in the ordinance that defines a bonus space. Mr. Ben-Zvi asked Mr. Marion if there is any restrictions so that a basement can only be used only for storage; he replied no. Mr. Ben-Zvi asked Mr. Marion what would prevent a tenant converting a basement into a bedroom; he said that a tenant is required to get a building permit to finish a basement and could only do what the town permits them to do. Rudoi Tiche approached the podium and stated that he lives at 10 Ridge Road. He asked Mr. Marion if the townhouses can be rented; he replied yes. Mr. Tiche asked Mr. Marion if there will be a limit on how many people can rent each one of the buildings; he said not that he is aware of. Chairman Neuer said that this Board does not rule on the form of ownership. He said that the presentation that the applicant is making to the Board is that they are being sold as condominium units and each unit will be owned by an individual family or person. Chairman Neuer said that there is nothing preventing them from leasing to other people and if the developer wants to put a restriction as to the number of people in each unit, then he can do that. Mr. Tiche asked if the Township has any restrictions as to the number of people living in one unit; Ms. Beirne said she thinks there is a limit only on rentals. Chairman Neuer advised Mr. Tiche that they will try to get that information for him before the next meeting. Kevin Malanga approached the podium again and asked Mr. Marion if the design of the townhouse was for occupancy of four (4) individuals per unit; he said each unit has multiple bedrooms and has the potential for people living in those bedrooms. 14

Mr. Malanga asked Mr. Marion if he had a conversation with the developer to design the townhouse for four (4) people; he said each unit has two (2) or three (3) bedrooms and typically there are two people in the master bedroom suite. Mr. Marion said that they were designed with the intent that they could have guests staying with them or parents and children living with them. He said that the occupancy level is not a hard number; it is an approximation. Cia Pak approached the podium again and asked Mr. Marion if he designed the way the traffic is going to flow. Chairman Neuer stated that Mr. Marion did not testify to traffic and that there is a traffic engineer who will be presenting testimony regarding traffic and the traffic flows. Mr. Williams stated for the record that Mr. Malanga’s statement was incorrect and that the architect did not say that he was asked to design the townhouses for four (4) people per unit; he said that Mr. Marion was asked what he anticipated the occupancy to be. Mr. Steinhart asked Mr. Marion who determined how the townhouses were to be built; he said that he was responsible for designing the building but the number of buildings on the site was not under his jurisdiction. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Marion if he was told to build a certain number of units and by whom; he said yes the developer. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Marion if the engineer determined how many buildings were to be on the site depending on the topography and the size of the site; he replied yes. Mr. Williams asked Mr. Steinhart if he wants to know what the rational was for building so many two (2) and three (3) bedroom units i.e. the demographics or the potential pricing; he said yes. Mr. Williams said that he will provide testimony to answer Mr. Steinhart’s question. Mr. Grygiel stated that he is ready to answer the question presented earlier regarding whether the townhouses with walkout basement are three (3) stories. He said the definition of a story according to the definition in the township ordinance 25-4b they are not three (3) story. 15

Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Grygiel if no variance will be required; he said yes there is no additional story for the basement so no variance is required. Mr. Grygiel said that he is not sure about the attic because no definitive height was presented in the architect’s testimony. Mr. Williams said that they will give the definitive height of the attic shortly. Chairman Neuer called for a break at 9:25 pm. Chairman Neuer resumed the meeting at 9:35 pm. Mr. Williams called his next witness. Brian Conway approached the podium and was sworn under oath. Mr. Conway detailed his professional and educational background as a licensed landscape architect and a professional planner licensed in the State of New Jersey. He said that he will not be testifying as a planner this evening and has testified before this Board before. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Conway if he has worked on similar projects of similar size and scope; he replied yes. Chairman Neuer accepted Mr. Conway as an expert landscape architect. Mr. Williams asked Mr. Conway if he prepared a tree inventory for the application; he replied yes. Mr. Conway stated that the site has a large variety of trees and is appears that it has experienced some disturbance in the past. He said that the site was previously developed because there is evidence of walkways, roads and walls on the site. Mr. Conway stated that originally he wanted to do a random sampling analysis of the trees on site but after meeting with the township forester, Mr. Linson, it was determined that there was not a big enough area to sample that is consistent. He said that instead of doing a random sampling analysis, they inventoried all of the trees in the developable part of the site. Chairman Neuer asked Mr, Conway to explain the difference between doing a random sampling analysis of the trees and the inventory of the trees that was taken; he said that a random sampling analysis is taken when there is a large number of the same size and types of trees on a very large site. Mr. Conway said that they could not do that so they inventoried every tree on the site except on the steep slopes. Mr. Conway said that the surveyors tagged every tree and he identified the trees and evaluated the condition of them. 16

Mr. Conway presented sheet two (2) of twenty two (22) of the preliminary and final site plan area map of Exhibit A-13, with a revision date of 2/10/16, that was pre-marked for identification and identified the trees on slopes greater than 15%. Mr. Conway presented the tree removal plan with a revision date of 2/10/16 that was pre-marked as Exhibit A-14 for identification. He referred to Exhibit A-14 and identified the fifty (50) trees that will be taken down on the slopes greater than 15%. Mr. Conway stated that he detailed the condition of the trees; he said there were eight hundred (800) trees on the site; Fifty seven (57) trees were in good condition, sixty (60) trees were in average condition, three hundred thirty one (331) trees were in fair condition, two hundred sixteen (216) were in poor condition, one hundred and twelve (112) trees were in very poor condition and twenty four (24) trees were dead. Mr. Conway detailed the ages of the trees on the site; he said eighty percent (80%) of the trees have been there between 25-35 years. Mr. Conway stated that four hundred eighty (480) trees are scheduled to be removed and three hundred twenty (320) trees are to remain. He said that they are proposing to plant eighty eight (88) major trees and two hundred ninety (290) minor trees on the site. There were no further questions regarding the trees from the Board Members. Mr. Keller referred to item #4 in his review memo dated 2/19/16 and said that there are potential discrepancies between sheet three (3) of the title and topographic survey and sheet sixteen (16) of the tree inventory and asked Mr. Conway to address that; he said that he went through all of the steep slope areas and updated sheet sixteen (16) and came up with fifty (50) trees on steep slopes. Mr. Conway said that sheet sixteen (16) and sheet three (3) are consistent. Mr. Conway said that Mr. Keller asked to have all of that information put on the plans which was very hard to do; he said he usually does the tree inventory in a booklet. Mr. Conway said that he can bring revised drawings the next time if Mr. Keller wants. Mr. Keller explained why this needs to be on the plans and not in a booklet. Mr. Keller stated that in order to make sure the fifty (50) tree count is accurate they must submit a revised sheet sixteen (16) along with a revised sheet three (3) re-submitted in color