November 13, 2024 Planning Board Special Meeting Transcript - WEHI

117 1 A Yeah, that’s it isn’t it? 2 Q SP-11 -- 3 A That’s it. 4 Q Now, I’m just going to just illustrate the 5 area. 6 A Sure. 7 Q Now, is there a survey of the different 8 species that were lost due to the 27 acre clear cut 9 that will comprise the area of disturbance? 10 A We did not do an analysis by number of each 11 species of tree. We did identify many of the species 12 that were present, but not by saying there were 57 13 white oak and 32 of this or the other thing in the 14 study area. What we did do is, we surveyed the area 15 and identified the fundamental number of trees that 16 were in the -- I’m sorry the fundamental types and 17 species of trees that are there to verify that this was 18 a mixed part of the forest. 19 Q Did you do any analysis as to the diameter of 20 specific species present in the area of disturbance? 21 A No. We didn’t look at a specific area and say 22 this white oak is 16 inches or four inches or something 23 of that note. 24 Q We don’t see a calculation of white oaks, 24 25 inches and higher, white oaks 12 inches to 24 inches or 118 1 anything like that? 2 A Correct. That wasn’t part of the parameters of 3 the study. 4 Q Now, who set the parameters? 5 A We set the parameters to calculate tree density, 6 so I set those parameters. Identified the general 7 species in the area and confirmed the type of forest. 8 Our concern was density and numbers of trees that would 9 be lost. That’s what we focused on. 10 Q Okay, thank you. Now, the undisturbed area 11 on this site that will not be fenced in relative to the 12 surrounding area or the new buildings that will be 13 built, is that correct? 14 A The undisturbed area will be comprised of two 15 sections. The undisturbed -- the deer fence area is 16 undisturbed area. So, there are two areas of 17 undisturbed property, one is deer fence here, here, 18 approximately 33 acres and the remaining undisturbed 19 area which is in green on this map, is just as it is 20 today. It will be undisturbed and not taken out or cut 21 down. 22 Q And when we say undisturbed you mean it will 23 undisturbed by means of construction or engineering 24 works? 25 A That’s correct. 119 1 Q Now, I appreciate the clarification, I was 2 referring to the undisturbed area not to the sides 3 where the fencing will be but, to the undisturbed area 4 that’s surrounding the area of disturbance. Now, that 5 area

te the clarification, I was 2 referring to the undisturbed area not to the sides 3 where the fencing will be but, to the undisturbed area 4 that’s surrounding the area of disturbance. Now, that 5 area will not be fenced in for deer protection, is that 6 correct? 7 A That’s correct. 8 Q So, since deer are prevalent in the area and 9 will be attracted to the woods, you will be typically 10 concentrating the deer presence on the unfenced 11 undisturbed area, isn’t that fair to say? 12 A Well, it’s presuming that the deer don’t move, 13 they will have less land to move within than they did 14 before because of the deer fencing, so I can’t say 15 they’re going to be concentrated it’s not as if they 16 live here exclusively, but when they come into this 17 area, they’ll have an area they can walk through. 18 Q Well -- 19 A When you say concentration you want to be clear 20 and say this is -- it’s not like this whole area is 21 fenced, let me put it to you that way, if this entire 22 property were simply fenced in, they put fencing and we 23 left the deer in here, then clearly they would be 24 confined and their population concentration would 25 increase, but we’re not doing that, they’ll be free to 120 1 leave the property. 2 Q We live in a free society, we don’t tell our 3 deer where they go. My question simply is, is by 4 fencing in the wooded area to the right and left of SP- 5 11, we will be allowing the deer to concentrate to the 6 extent they’re on this property, to the unfenced area, 7 isn’t that correct? 8 A They will be more confined in their movement, that 9 is correct. 10 Q And, therefore, they will be able to have a 11 greater browsing impact on that forest than they do 12 today, isn’t that correct? 13 A Well, we’ve had this conversation I think from the 14 residents asking the same question and the simple, the 15 answer is, certainly the deer will have less room to 16 browse in this area and they could have a negative 17 impact as we talked about part of the goal of having 18 the deer fencing plus the planting of native plants in 19 the disturbed area, is to begin to get a higher 20 concentration of feeding in these areas with the 21 hopeful growth of greater plant numbers here because 22 we’ll have so much more coming from this area, the 23 undisturbed area, will have so much more 24 transplantation if you will, of the feeding and the 25 plant

of greater plant numbers here because 22 we’ll have so much more coming from this area, the 23 undisturbed area, will have so much more 24 transplantation if you will, of the feeding and the 25 plant movement than we did before.

121 1 Now, will the deer be, again, they have less 2 room to roam, so they will roam in this small area as 3 they do today because the impacting variable. In this 4 area, if the wrong species and I say wrong only insofar 5 as saying if all of the native species planted happened 6 to be deer preferred, they you’re going to have to get 7 a greater level of work done here to protect them, 8 again, either using chemical repellants and looking to 9 be very clear when I say chemical repellants, we’re 10 talking about nontoxic repellants that contain pepper, 11 oil, that sort of thing that the deer find unpalatable. 12 Q Well, my question was simply for fencing of 13 large parts of the site on the right and left, the deer 14 that tend to live in this area will tend to concentrate 15 more on the unfenced area and, hence, do their browsing 16 there in greater intensity then they are right now, 17 isn’t that correct? 18 A Or they will move to other areas. 19 Q Well, you mean backyards? 20 A Well, if they come up to here, this area is not -- 21 is either undisturbed or disturbed, different 22 properties, there’s vacant right now. 23 Q Well, presumably that’s already happening 24 because that’s an existing condition, right? 25 A It’s possible. 122 1 Q So, in other words, this will cause greater 2 focus of the deer on the unfenced wooded area, isn’t 3 that fair to say? 4 A The deer will have less room to roam. 5 Q Is it a yes to my question? 6 A Well, it’s not a yes or no type of question. It’s 7 wildlife, wildlife doesn’t -- the deer don’t really 8 look so they don’t read the studies so, the odds are 9 very good that they will walk through here and find, 10 oh, I can’t go in this fenced area so I have to go 11 somewhere else -- 12 Q Well, I’m asking -- 13 A -- this is overly -- I’m trying to answer your 14 question. They may only concentrate in given areas, 15 even if there is nothing for them to eat. Right now, 16 there is very limited deer browsing here. We hope to 17 actually increase the number of plants growing. If I 18 lose some to deer browse, I’m fine with that overall 19 because I will have increased the health of the deer 20 and the forest simultaneously. 21 And, also, and most important by the way, I 22 know we focus on deer a great deal, my other concern is 23 or my other benefit of the deer fencing, sorry, when we 24 have areas that begin to regenerate with

also, and most important by the way, I 22 know we focus on deer a great deal, my other concern is 23 or my other benefit of the deer fencing, sorry, when we 24 have areas that begin to regenerate with undergrowth I 25 benefit smaller game. I’ll benefit rabbits, I’ll 123 1 benefit other small wildlife because they’ll have more 2 area to hide, they’ll have more area to eat themselves, 3 rabbits, for example, et cetera. So, generally, what 4 we find is when areas are deer fencing to get 5 regenerational, all wildlife benefits. 6 Q I just asked if this part of the forest was 7 going to more browsing, yes or no? 8 A It’s possible. 9 Q Okay, thank you. Have you done any study as 10 to the impact of the construction as shown on SP-11 on 11 the wetlands that are below the developed -- the area 12 to be developed? 13 A No, that’s outside the area. I rely on wetlands 14 protection to be with the Department of Environmental 15 Protection. 16 Q Well, there are trees in the wetlands, are 17 there not? 18 A It’s an undisturbed area and it will be determined 19 as to what can be done. There are uppers and 20 requirements that DEP will determine that to be meant. 21 Q Well, storm water runoff from the developed 22 area will be diverted to detention basins and is it 23 fair to say they will no longer go to the wetlands as 24 it has and wouldn’t that affect the ecology of the 25 trees that live there? 124 1 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: We didn’t ask them to 2 do that, we did ask him to look at that. We didn’t ask 3 them to do that. 4 MR. AFRAN: Well, we talked about trees on 5 the site and the impact to the client, and I’m asking 6 won’t this affect the wooded areas in the wetlands? 7 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I think that’s a 8 question for the engineer and it’s storm water 9 question. 10 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yeah, that’s -- 11 MR. AFRAN: Well, I don’t think the 12 engineer knows much about trees, this gentlemen says he 13 does know about trees, so, I’m asking the gentlemen who 14 says he knows about trees. 15 MR. CHAIRPERSON: He didn’t look at the tree 16 -- we didn’t ask him to look at the trees in the 17 wetland because we have -- the applicant nor us have 18 any control over that. Okay. 19 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Well, I’m simply 20 asking whether he did that analysis. 21 MR. CHAIRPERSON: Okay. You can ask whether 22 he did it or not. 23 THE WITNESS: I did not do a secondary 24

. Okay. 19 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Well, I’m simply 20 asking whether he did that analysis. 21 MR. CHAIRPERSON: Okay. You can ask whether 22 he did it or not. 23 THE WITNESS: I did not do a secondary 24 analysis, storm water was done by the engineers and was 25 done by DEP.

125 1 Q Let’s just -- 2 A (indiscernible) impacts are done by DEP. 3 Q Right. I’m not asking about storm water now, 4 I’m asking about impacts on the wetlands and deviation 5 of the normal storm water. 6 A All of that is determined by the Department of 7 Environmental Protection, it’s outside my purview. 8 Q Fair enough. Appreciate it. Now, would you 9 turn to the slide documenting the number of trees to be 10 lost from the project? I don’t recall the title of the 11 slide. 12 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I know which one 13 you’re referring to. 14 MR. AFRAN: We don’t need that. 15 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Hang on. Is that it? 16 MR. AFRAN: Let me look at my -- 17 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: General findings. 18 Talks about the acreage and the total of trees? No, 19 that‘s not it. 20 MR. AFRAN: I think I’m looking at tree 21 removal front -- 22 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: You’re right. It’s 23 the wrong slide, I apologize. That one. I think 24 that’s the slide you’re referring -- great. 25 MR. AFRAN: By the way, it’s not a criticism 126 1 but it’s easier if page numbers go on these. 2 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: That’s on me. My bad. 3 Q So, I just want to clarify, get into the 4 record these numbers. The area of disturbance is 27.5 5 acres (indiscernible) -- 6 (Multiple speakers) 7 MR. AFRAN: Sorry? 8 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: The numbers actually 9 appear as a consequence -- 10 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: They don’t change. 11 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Oh, they don’t? 12 MR. AFRAN: What do you mean? What’s the 13 matter? 14 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: We thought that there 15 was number on the -- 16 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Oh, the pages, but 17 you’re saying -- 18 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Oh -- 19 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I don’t know. This is 20 not the PowerPoint so there’s a confusion. This is a 21 pdf. 22 MR. AFRAN: Yeah, so I’m referring as much as 23 I can to the title so that if anyone looks at this, we 24 know as best we can what we’re looking at. 25 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Sure. 127 1 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: We thought maybe there 2 was another way, but -- 3 MR. AFRAN: I’m sorry. Is it possible it 4 make it a drop darker, I just can’t see. I appreciate 5 that. Thank you, perfect. 6 Q So, the area of the surface on this slide is 7 27.5 acres and the total number of trees, the maximum 8 we’re looking is 5,833, is that correct? 9 A Correct. 10 Q And you find on this slide, you indicate a 11 total trees on

rface on this slide is 7 27.5 acres and the total number of trees, the maximum 8 we’re looking is 5,833, is that correct? 9 A Correct. 10 Q And you find on this slide, you indicate a 11 total trees on site, as plus or minus 25,440, is that 12 correct? 13 A Yes. 14 Q And by site you mean 120 acre property. 15 A Correct. 16 Q Okay, thank you. Now, it does say a minimum 17 of trees preserved forever on minimum 77 percent of 18 trees preserved forever. There was some discussion of 19 this from the public. Does that mean there’s a 20 conservation easement to your knowledge to be on the 21 property or is it voluntary preservation by the 22 developer? 23 A I can’t speak to what the ordinance says I can 24 just say that area is actually undisturbed area. I 25 don’t believe that’s all referenced in the ordinance. 128 1 Q That’s fine. Did you do any studies of this 2site in terms of the affect on property, of 3fragmentation of the forest. 4 A No. 5 Q And by fragmentation, you understand I mean 6 the removal, say, of 27 acres approximately in the 7 center of the site. 8 A Correct. Yes, I understand what you’re saying, we 9 did not. 10 Q Why wouldn’t the study on fragmentation be 11 relevant to determining, ultimately, the future health 12 of the property? 13 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Joe, could I ask you 14 to enlarge that for me, please? 15 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yeah, that’s S-11. 16 I’m sorry. 17 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: No, no, it’s okay. 18 That’s it, that’s fine. 19 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yeah it -- 20 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Oh, whatever number, 21 right, Slide 12. It is working. Slide 12 for future 22 reference, as well. You won’t see it from there. It’s 23 all the way up here. So, that’ll be -- that’s the page 24 for slide -- well, you see, that’s the problem. On the 25 printed version --

129 1 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: It wouldn’t appear on 2 the printed version. 3 MR. AFRAN: It doesn’t come out on printed 4 version, so that’s why I gave her a record of these we 5 looked at, I still feel like we can refer to -- 6 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: That’s okay. 7 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yeah, yeah, that’s 8 fine, 9 THE WITNESS: This is SP-11 to be in context 10 that slide. To answer your question about 11 fragmentation. This forest is not being very heavily 12 fragmented. For the most part it’ll be contiguous, 13 with the exception, of course, of the road passages 14 that are here. But, otherwise there is contiguous 15 passage throughout, disregarding the fenced area, of 16 course, which we are purposely pulling out of this. 17 But, fragmentation typically refers to something where 18 if I took this entire piece, came down to the bottom of 19 the slide, and all the way up to here, now I’ve 20 fragmented this forest into two pieces rather than what 21 we have here. 22 Part of the basis here in this design, which 23 I like, is that the forest, while not completely 24 contiguous, this is not an access road. So, there 25 actually is contiguous passage throughout this area. 130 1 There is certainly some fragmentation, obviously, where 2 we’re putting -- where the building will be put and 3 where the primary road is, but depending on what this 4 Board does, of course, even this road would be non- 5 competitive to passage, if, in fact, the road is not 6 for daily use. So, there’s quite a bit of free 7 movement, is I guess the way I would put that. It’s 8 not fragmenting the forest to say this development in 9 Essex Fells did, or this development in West Orange 10 did, this is fragmenting the forest. This is what we 11 talk about when we say fragmentation, this kind of 12 suburban single family home development. This is what 13 ties together the -- 14 Q Is it fair to say that you don’t consider the 15 construction of these four very large buildings and 16 parking facilities in the center of this forest to be 17 fragmented? 18 A I didn’t say that. What I said is -- 19 Q Is it -- 20 A -- development fragmentation is minor compared to 21 the other types of development. In green building 22 design one of the things you try to do to minimize 23 damage and to minimize fragmentation, is to concentrate 24 development into the smallest footprint possible. This 25 does that.

green building 22 design one of the things you try to do to minimize 23 damage and to minimize fragmentation, is to concentrate 24 development into the smallest footprint possible. This 25 does that. This type of development here, this type of 131 1 development here is much more impactful of the forest 2 and historic, these are historic buildings, I’m not 3 suggesting there’s any wrong with it. The old crop 4 dust coater, I’m sure, from a green building standpoint 5 and a forestry standpoint, this is infinitely more 6 destructive to the environment than what this is 7 proposing because this minimizes the fragmentation. 8 Certainly is a form of fragmentation, I will not argue 9 that. But, it is less impactful on an overall basis, 10 than most other types of development. 11 Q My question was only, did you do any study on 12 effect on the ecology of the site due to the 13 fragmentation of this project? 14 A And I think I answered you. 15 Q Did you do any self-study? 16 A No, it’s outside of my purview. 17 Q That’s all I asked. Okay. Thank you. Did 18 you do any analysis of fauna that are present on the 19 site, aside from your observing the seven to ten-year 20 medication? 21 A We did not do a wildlife analysis, that was not a 22 part of the project. 23 Q Have you done any analysis -- the question 24 would probably be the same, so if it’d be the same I 25 imagine you just state for the record, did you do any 132 1 analysis on the impact of bird migration across this 2 property or like history of birds who live on this 3 site? 4 A We did not do any analysis of wildlife at all. I 5 think we do with wildlife specifically, is within 6 DEEP’s purview. 7 Q Well, whether it is or is not I’m not sure I 8 simply asked whether you did the analysis. 9 A The answer is no. 10 MR. AFRAN: I’m sorry, I’m just going through 11 my notes quickly, I don’t want to -- 12 THE CHAIRPERSON: It’s okay. 13 Q I’m a little puzzled because when you 14 testified at the last meeting, either direct or in 15 response to questions, you said that, and I wrote down 16 what you said, I think it’s a pretty accurate quote. I 17 look at everything, birds, plants, et cetera, from 18 holistic point of view. Do you recall saying that? 19 A Yes. 20 Q Well, then why didn’t you do any study of 21 wildlife or birds and the impact of this project on 22 that wildlife, if that’s what you do holistically? 23 A