October 4, 2017

TOWNSHIP OF WEST ORANGE PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES October 4, 2017 The Township of West Orange Planning Board held a regular meeting on October 4, 2017 at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chamber, 66 Main Street, West Orange, New Jersey. Mr. Weston called the meeting to order at approximately 7:44 P.M. He announced that notification of the meeting was given to the Township Clerk, and posted on the Township Bulletin Board, sent to the West Orange Chronicle and the Star Ledger, and posted on the Township’s website calendar. This meeting has been properly noticed to the public in accordance with the Open Public Meetings Act. No new matters will start after 10:30 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mr. Weston requested all persons stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. ANNOUNCEMENTS The next Planning Board regular meeting will be November 1, 2017 in the Council Chamber at 7:30 P.M. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Chairman Robert Bagoff (7:57 P.M.), John Cardoza, Jerome Eben, Michael Keigher, Councilwoman Susan McCartney, Andrew Trenk, Gary Wegner, Ron Weston, William Wilkes II ABSENT: Tekeste Ghebremicael, Vice Chairman Lee Klein ALSO PRESENT: Paul Grygiel, Township Planning Director Eric Keller, Township Consulting Engineer Patrick J. Dwyer, Esq., Board Attorney Robin Miller, Board Secretary Harvey Grossman, Esq., Public Advocate ADOPT MINUTES The minutes of the September 6, 2017 Planning Board meetings were unanimously adopted. SWEARING IN Township Professionals: Paul Grygiel, AICP, PP, Township Planner and Eric Keller, PE, PP, Township Consulting Engineer. CORRECTED RESOLUTION PB-17-03/Crestmont Country Club by Scott Wlodychak Block: 174, Lots: 1 & 1.01, Zone: R-2 750 Eagle Rock Avenue Preliminary and Final Site Plan with “C” variances. Approved 5/3/17 Adopted 6/7/17

Mr. Dwyer advised the Board there were corrections identified by the Secretary, including the Applicant’s address and the date of the Approval. The Board voted on the corrected Resolution as follows: Motion: Mr. Eben Second: Mr. Cardoza Cardoza: Yes Trenk: Yes Eben: Yes Wegner: Yes Ghebremicael: Absent Weston: - Klein: Absent Wilkes: - Keigher: Yes Bagoff: | Absent McCartney: - Mr. Weston announced a brief recess at approximately 7:51 P.M. to allow for the arrival of Chairman Bagoff to hear Application PB-17-08/Crestmont Country Club. Chairman Bagoff reconvened the meeting at approximately 7:57 P.M. APPLICATION PB-17-08/Crestmont Country Club Block: 174, Lots: 1 & 1.01, Zone: R-2 750 Eagle Rock Avenue Preliminary and Final Major Site Plan with “C” variances. Carried from the September 6, 2017 regular meeting. APPLICANT EXHIBITS A-1: Main Level Furniture Floor Plan, Page 4A, dated 9/1/17, JGA Architectural Design; A-2: Lower Level Floor Finishes Plan, Page 2, dated 9/1/17, JGA Architectural Design; A-3: Main Level Floor Finishes Plan, Page 4, dated 9/1/17, JGA Architectural Design; A-4: Proposed Exterior Renderings (2) Guest & Member Entry View, Course View, Page 6, dated 9/1/17, JGA Architectural Design; A-5: Proposed Exterior Color Rendering — Finishes for Guest Entry, Roof, Ladies Lounge, Front & Side Elevations, Page 7, dated 9/1/17, JGA Architectural Design; A-6: Pool Plan, Page 26, dated 9/1/17, JGA Architectural Design; A-7: Exterior Pool Rendering, Page 27, dated 9/1/17, JGA Architectural Design; A-8: Lower Level Floor Plan, part of response letter dated 9/4/17; 3 drawings A1.0, A1.1, A3.1 (undated) issued in response to Bowman Memo dated 8/31/17 (Exhibit for Testimonial Purposes only); A-9: Color Rending Site Plan, Drawing No. 17-126-SP-1, dated 8/31/17, Boswell Engineering; A-10: Color Rendering Steep Slope Analysis-Existing Conditions, Drawing No. 17-126-SS- 1, dated 9/1/17, Boswell Engineering; A-11: Site Plan Drawing Set, 17 Sheets, Revised 8/24/17, Boswell Engineering DISCUSSION Richard J. Angowski, Jr., Esq., Olender Feldman, appeared on behalf of Applicant. He stated the hearing was a continuation of the the September 6, 2017 meeting. Subsequent to that meeting, the Applicant had submitted updated and revised plans. The revised plans had removed a portion of the Application that had raised some consternation with some

members of the Public, and had also increased the scope of the Application. He opined that the removal of that portion of the Application changed the type of the Application from a Major to Minor Site Plan. There would be some brief testimony from Applicant’s architect, Wayne Jacques, in reply to comments based on revisions and from Applicant's engineer, Jeffrey Morris, Boswell Engineering, to testify on engineering and planning. Mr. Angowski stated the Applicant had initially proposed a new exit driveway; however, after receiving comments from the Board and Public, the Applicant determined to remove the proposed driveway from the plan. The Applicant was concerned about the environmental impact of tree removal and the Public comments stating the lack of a necessity for a new driveway. By removing the driveway, the Applicant would save many trees. The Applicant also conducted a safety analysis and believed the driveway safe as it currently existed; however, they still maintained the proposed driveway might have provided an optimization of egress from the property. The Applicant had also conducted an OPRA request to the Township for accident reports from the past five years and determined that no accidents had occurred within that period at the club’s current point of egress. The club would ensure the site triangle would be be clear so that vehicles exiting both left and right had a clear line of sight. Mr. Angowski called Wayne J. Jacques, AIA, JGA Architectural Design, to the podium to address the comments he had received from the Township professionals regarding his revised plans. Mr. Dwyer advised Mr. Jacques he had testified previously and was still under oath. Mr. Jacques responded to Mr. Keller's review memo dated 9/29/17; referencing Item #39, (‘The dumpster enclosure detail should be revised to include its width and footing information The response letter indicated that this information is shown on sheet AO.1, but has not been provided.”), Mr. Jacques stated he would resubmit the sheet with all the required information. Referencing Item #40, (Architectural plans should show materials and colors for the proposed improvements.), he stated he would also resubmit revised sheets A5.1, A5.2 and A5.3 clarifying all requested details. Mr. Keller stated he was satisfied with Mr. Jacques testimony; he advised the Board to make it a condition of any approval

resubmit revised sheets A5.1, A5.2 and A5.3 clarifying all requested details. Mr. Keller stated he was satisfied with Mr. Jacques testimony; he advised the Board to make it a condition of any approval the Board would grant to have the Applicant provide the information as testified. Chairman Bagoff asked the Board if they had any questions for Mr. Jacques. Mr. Eben stated there were approximately a half-dozen dumpsters on the site, he understood the plan referenced the main dumpster, but he wanted to know about all the other ones on the property. Mr. Angowski stated a representative of the club could answer the question. The Public Advocate had no questions for Mr. Jacques. Chairman Bagoff asked the Public if they had questions for Mr. Jacques. Robert Rashkes, 35 Oak Crest Road, stated (the Applicant) had performed a traffic study about accidents occurring at the existing exit driveway; he asked if the accident analysis also covered the entire perimeter of the property area from Eagle Rock Avenue to the club’s property line. Mr. Angowski stated the Applicant had not done a traffic study; the WOPD provided the accident report information in reply to OPRA request submitted by Applicant. The area of the report covered the most recent five-year period for the area of Eagle Rock Avenue between Laurel Avenue and Wakeman Street; he stated that although there had

been some accidents, none had occurred at the exit site. Mr. Rashkes asked if any of the accidents involved pedestrians walking on the site of Crestmont Country Club. Mr. Angowski stated not to his knowledge. Mr. Rashkes stated (the Applicant) testified the exit driveway was currently “safe as it is’ and there would be no sight impediments when vehicles exit. Mr. Angowski stated that was part of his opening statement. The engineer would provide further testimony about the exit driveway; that would be a better question for him to answer. Robert Daniel, Buckingham Road, asked what was the estimated cost of the entire Application. Chairman Bagoff asked Mr. Angowski if that testimony had been entered in to the record. Mr. Angowski answered no. Chairman Bagoff advised Mr. Daniel the question was not relevant to the testimony. Mr. Daniel stated he was still asking the question par the uniform construction code application; he said he assumed the Applicant knew the estimated cost of the work. Chairman Bagoff asked Mr. Jacques if he knew the estimated cost of the work, and could he testify to the matter based on his knowledge. Mr. Jacques stated no. Mr. Daniel stated the President of the country club was present. Chairman Bagoff stated (the President) was not currently testifying. Mr. Daniel stated that since only the architect was presently testifying, could he ask the same question again. Chairman Bagoff said yes. There were no further questions for Mr. Jacques. Mr. Angowski called his next witness, Jeffrey Morris, PE, PP, Boswell Engineering, who was both engineer and planner for the project. Mr. Dwyer asked Mr. Morris if he understood he was still under oath; Mr. Morris stated yes. Mr. Morris stated the original plan included a new exit driveway at the northerly portion of the parking lot exiting opposite Oval Road on to Eagle Rock Avenue. After listening to the concerns expressed at the previous meeting he did a personal analysis of the current intersection; he measured the site distance to the east, which was approximately 475 feet; the site distance to the west was over 500 feet; both site distances were ample for a 40 MPH road. He stated there were some very high weeds that would be trimmed and landscaped. Weeds would no longer become overgrown; there would be a permanent landscaping maintenance plan. He stated (at the previous meeting) numerous people

ry high weeds that would be trimmed and landscaped. Weeds would no longer become overgrown; there would be a permanent landscaping maintenance plan. He stated (at the previous meeting) numerous people had asked about accidents at the existing exit; he had obtained accident reports from the Township for the past five years for the area of Eagle Rock Avenue between Laurel Avenue and Wakeman Street. Over the last five years there had been approximately forty accidents, the vast majority occurred at either Laurel Avenue or Oval Road. There had been only one accident in the area of the club's exit due to a motorist heading east trying to merge right then hit a car also heading east. The accident was not the result of a vehicle exiting the club’s driveway. Mr. Morris stated the original plan called for the total removal of approximately sixty-eight trees; the revised project removed a total of twenty-nine trees, saving forty-four trees. He stated where the new driveway had previously been proposed, a new water line would still be installed for fire protection and rude domestic water. A total of eleven trees would be removed to run the line; nine within 75 feet of the property line along Eagle Rock Avenue, and two outside of the 75 feet area. Mr. Morris stated the steep slope concerns along Eagle Rock Avenue and the rear parking area discussed at the previous meeting had been addressed. The revised plan would only 4

disturb the steep slope in the area of the small section to install the two water lines, and the area between the pool house. He stated the new plan proposed a net gain of fifteen trees. Regarding the parking lot plan, Mr. Morris stated they reduced the area of pavement in auxiliary lot area and replaced with tree plantings, the plan reorganized the club’s parking lot to include the addition of two spaces near the pool area for a total of 249 parking spaces. Mr. Morris stated that since the previous meeting, he had the course arborist review the trees questioned for removal. The arborist had determined that all the trees were dead or dying and should be removed; he listed the trees slated for removal. In response to question from Mr. Angowski, Mr. Morris stated the revised plan made the parking lot much more organized; islands would be installed to further channelize traffic; he believed he had optimized the maximum possible number of parking spaces. In response to a resident's question from the previous meeting regarding installing a chairlift instead of a ramp, Mr. Morris explained that for this project, a ramp would provide better access for all persons. In addition to making the area ADA accessible, it would make it easier for parents who had young children in strollers. Mr. Morris stated the revised plan improved the site’s impervious coverage, making it slightly less. In response inquiry from Mr. Dwyer, Mr. Morris stated the existing maximum lot coverage was 8.42%, proposed was 8.45%; the maximum lot coverage permitted (in R-2 Zone) was 30%. Mr. Angowski asked that Mr. Morris respond to Mr. Keller’s review memo dated 9/29/17; Mr. Keller stated that if Applicant agreed to complete all requests, it was not necessary to respond point-by-point before the Board. Mr. Angowski stated he would like to clarify that a couple of Items had already been satisfied - Item #20, (Copy and/or delineation of any existing or proposed deed restrictions or covenants.) and Item #21, (Any existing or proposed easement or land reserved for or dedicated to public use.) Mr. Keller confirmed the items were satisfied. He stated the only easement the Applicant would have to deal with was the one with Public Service — they had an easement for lights, but it had no impact from a land use perspective. Mr. Keller stated Item #45 (Landscaping plan & details prepared by a

e to deal with was the one with Public Service — they had an easement for lights, but it had no impact from a land use perspective. Mr. Keller stated Item #45 (Landscaping plan & details prepared by a professional landscape architect.), was for the Board's action; it was an ordinance requirement. Under State regulations, engineers were permitted to sign for landscape plans. He stated it was technically a waiver to Township ordinance. Mr. Angowski stated he was formally requesting the waiver. Mr. Angowski stated if Mr. Keller did not wish to discuss the memo point-by-point, he would defer to him if he did have any questions for Mr. Morris. Chairman Bagoff suggested Mr. Morris testify to those items in need of further discussion. Item #4, (Engineer shall provide testimony regarding the guard booth.), Mr. Morris stated the booth would be removed. Item #6, (The island at the northern end of the single loaded parking bay adjacent to the service court should be extended to reduce the pavement area.), and Item #21, (...Consideration should be given to reducing the large pavement area in the parking lot adjacent to the loading/refuse area...). Mr. Keller asked Mr. Morris consider to make the areas more defined and attractive. Mr. Morris stated that because of the turning movements in some parts of the service area and golf cart traffic in other areas, he was reluctant to 5

eliminate some of the pavement. Referring to Site Plan Sheet 12 of 17, (last revised 9/21/17), Mr. Morris identified the area and described the turning movement. He stated the plan had been upgraded from SU-30 Single-Unit Truck, to an SU-40 Single-Unit (three- axle). Mr. Keller stated the plan should provide some sort of striping and arrows to indicate how vehicles maneuver through the lot, and he wanted more trees planted in the area. Mr. Morris agreed to the condition; he stated he would add stripping and arrows to the plan to indicate channelized traffic flow, he would flip the direction for the service vehicles. He said he could put some knockouts in the curbing to add some trees. Mr. Keller stated he was satisfied. Item #7, (It appears the parking layout could be further modified to enhance its efficiency...the large pavement area located north of the pool house should be designed with 24” wide isle widths, curbed islands, and additional parking to minimize the parking deficiency... Additionally, the handicap parking spaces should be moved closer to the pool house.). Mr. Keller stated that the Applicant was removing a tree in the parking lot area north to the pool house; the tree was located on a small paved island. He stated there was room for a couple of additional spaces. Mr. Morris stated there was room for four additional spaces; he thanked Mr. Keller for the suggestion because it helped with the grading of the handicapped spaces. Item # 8, (Testimony should be provided regarding the methods to resurface the parking lot and if it will include milling...) Mr. Morris stated yes, the parking lot would be milled and resurfaced. Item #11, (Testimony is to be provided regarding the need for a handicapped space and accessible route to the most northerly one-story building adjacent to the overflow parking area.) Mr. Morris stated he did not know if there was a need, but the Applicant would comply with the request to include a handicapped space if required by code. Item #14, (We recommend walkways for patrons along the front of the main building to minimize walking in the main drive aisles.) Mr. Morris stated the he had added the walkway. Item #24, (There is limited lighting (via floodlights) of the existing overflow parking area, which should be eliminated and a lighting design provided conforming to Township requirements.) Mr. Keller asked if it was

is limited lighting (via floodlights) of the existing overflow parking area, which should be eliminated and a lighting design provided conforming to Township requirements.) Mr. Keller asked if it was still the Applicant’s intent not to change the existing lighting. Mr. Morris stated no revision was proposed. Mr. Keller asked if there was a reason the club did not want to install a lighting system that conformed to Township standards. Mr. Morris stated the club used the overflow parking area rarely at night; they did not want to add poles and curbs for islands. Mr. Angowski stated that if the Board would permit, the club would probably restrict access to the overflow lot during nighttime hours; if not, he would ask the club if they would reconsider. Mr. Keller stated the Board should consider the appropriateness of limiting access to the area during nighttime hours. It would be difficult to enforce if there was a large nighttime event. The area was illuminated; it just did not conform to Township standards. Item #25, (Provisions for security lighting are to be discussed in testimony, including the hours of illumination, and if there are different requirements for different portions of the site.) Mr. Keller asked if the lights in the overflow area were dusk-to-dawn photocell. Mr. Morris stated the Applicant planned to install dusk-to-dawn with motion detectors on some of them. Mr. Keller stated the final plans identify the lights to be on all the time; the rest of the lights 6