September 11, 2024 Planning Board Special Meeting Transcript - WEHI

17 of 71 sheets Page 65 to 68 of 180 09/27/2024 06:14:01 AM 65 this it does. I'm going to leave it on the table. We1 can't do anything with this because we must hear the2 application. The application is in progress. You can3 take that back to the council. We will hear the4 application. I understand what you said and the board5 will take that information and weigh it and the6 applicant has the option or opportunity to refute it or7 add to it. But thank you very much. We appreciate the8 concern the Town Council brought up.9 THE PUBLIC: Thank you.10 MR. PLOCKER: And Chairman, if I may for a11 second.12 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Mr. Plocker.13 MR. PLOCKER: And just for the record, it14 would not be within this boards jurisdiction to15 determine which set of storm water management16 regulations apply to the application. I know it was17 discussed and perhaps this is a good time, I had talked18 to Ms. McGovern about it, I know there was some concern19 or just the board asking for some backup, I would like20 to mark as an exhibit, what are we up to A-4?21 MS. MCGOVERN: A-4.22 MR. PLOCKER: Yeah. I did provide this to23 Ms. McGovern. There is an e-mail that was written from24 Danielle Jones, she's an environmental engineer with the25 66 Division of Land Resource Protection at the New Jersey1 Department of Environmental Protection. It was written2 in response to a query that Jennifer Shari, who I know3 has appeared here during these proceedings and inquiring4 about the storm water rules and which ones apply. And5 I'm just going to read the Danielle Jones very brief6 e-mail to Ms. Shari. It's dated July 31, 2024. It was7 sent to her at 7:46 AM. It says, "The FHA application8 is being reviewed under the current FHA Rule" and I9 believe that stands for Flood Hazard Area" however, the10 storm water portion of the application is being reviewed11 under the previous version of the storm water rule as it12 was never withdrawn and still pending under the FWW13 application. The FWW storm water review is being14 conducted under the version of the rule which was15 current at the time that the application was submitted."16 And I would like to have that marked as A-4 and I will17 submit it to you.18 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Great. Can you give19 Jamilet a copy of that.20 Mr. Afran, have a question at all?21 MR. AFRAN: Just a moment.22 MS. MCGOVERN: It will not be marked A,23 because it's not an

to you.18 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Great. Can you give19 Jamilet a copy of that.20 Mr. Afran, have a question at all?21 MR. AFRAN: Just a moment.22 MS. MCGOVERN: It will not be marked A,23 because it's not an applicant. So we are going to mark24 the Verona resolution as, do we have opposition, did you25 67 submit anything in opposition?1 MR. AFRAN: Which one, I'm sorry.2 MS. MCGOVERN: Did you submit anything that3 we marked already, I don't remember.4 MR. AFRAN: I don't believe we submitted5 anything.6 MS. MCGOVERN: So that would be O-1.7 MR. AFRAN: Oh no, wait.8 MS. MCGOVERN: O-2.9 MR. AFRAN: Well, why you say that, with10 respect, O?11 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Opposition.12 MR. AFRAN: O, that would be opposition.13 Not me. I didn't submit anything.14 MS. MCGOVERN: What was O-1?15 THE SECRETARY: That was the engineering.16 The one that --17 MS. MCGOVERN: Boswell. Okay. So that is18 actually attached. So the cover letter, the resolution19 I should say, is now O-2 and Boswell is marked O-1,20 which is the report of July 26, 2024. Okay.21 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Okay.22 You're up Mr. Afran.23 MR. AFRAN: Just the reservation of right.24 I understand the e-mail Mr. Plocker read into the25 68 record, I am familiar with it. We do not, as the1 objectors, we do necessarily accept the engineer from2 DEP conclusion is correct. As a matter of law she is3 not necessarily a decider of the legal question in terms4 of what regulations are applicable, so the objectors are5 reserving their position on this issue. We do not6 necessarily accept the reference that the engineer made7 and Mr. Plocker recited. It may well be our position in8 the appropriate forum, whether it's in a court or at9 DEP, that the new regulations must be deemed to apply.10 But I just want to note, I don't want my silence to have11 suggested that we necessarily agree with the position12 Mr. Plocker took. We are reserving our right to suggest13 and argue appropriately that the new regulations may be14 appropriate.15 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Okay. We take note.16 MR. AFRAN: Thank you.17 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you.18 Mr. Plocker.19 MR. PLOCKER: The applicant would like to20 call the traffic engineer, Karl Pehnke.21 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you.22 MS. MCGOVERN: State you name for the23 record.24 THE WITNESS: Certainly. It's Karl, with a25