December 11, 2024 Planning Board Special Meeting Transcript - WEHI

9 of 38 sheets Page 33 to 36 of 100 01/08/2025 12:06:06 PM 33 where Building D would be on this present plan. If we1 can move over to the right and up a little bit. So2 that's roughly, that's kind of near the ridge, that's3 roughly where Building D would be in part on the plans,4 right?5 I don't know.6 A. Okay.7 Q. But -- so let's move down to the text on the8 bottom of the document, if you can. Now, if we could --9 let me just open my copy which I can see more easily.10 Now, they find, if you look at, if we could zero in a11 little more on that text. If you could make it a little12 bigger.13 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Mr. Afran, are you going14 to make this somewhat cohesive with what we're looking15 at today? If there's not going to be a nexus with16 looking at something because the original plan had17 single family homes, this is not that plan.18 MR. AFRAN: The trees are the same, sir.19 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: I'm sorry.20 MR. AFRAN: It's a survey of trees.21 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Right, it's a survey of22 trees, as we see it is an overlay of single family23 homes. So the understanding of the two different24 applications before us, the application before us is one25 34 thing that these trees, that his study shows in the area1 of disturbance. These seem to be outside the area of2 disturbance for today. I just want to see if there's a3 nexus somewhere that we can say, I'm relating it because4 of this.5 MR. AFRAN: Well, I certainly think the6 square on the right side is probably the area of7 Building D, but the other two -- and the one in the8 center is probably in the area of disturbance of the9 center building. The one to the far left is probably10 not --11 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Are we going to get to12 something the board can use? Some information we want13 to see or hear.14 MR. AFRAN: If I could, you'll see we're not15 referencing it specifically to the area of disturbance.16 We're looking at the quantum of trees.17 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Okay.18 MR. AFRAN: That's the purpose.19 MR. PLOCKER: How is that relevant for these20 proceedings?21 MR. AFRAN: Because -- well, that's why Mr.22 DeFeo is here.23 MR. PLOCKER: Well, it seems like it doesn't24 like the tree number in the ordinance, which is in the25 35 ordinance, which could have been challenged. We're not1 here to challenge ordinances or question the propriety2 of the zoning ordinance.3 MR. AFRAN: I don't know if Mr.

ordinance, which is in the25 35 ordinance, which could have been challenged. We're not1 here to challenge ordinances or question the propriety2 of the zoning ordinance.3 MR. AFRAN: I don't know if Mr. Plocker's4 referring to --5 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: We'll give some latitude.6 The board has to hear how it's relevant. Go along,7 we'll see if the board finds more information that is8 relevant.9 MR. AFRAN: Yeah, I'm sorry, if we could10 just zero in as much as possible. We only need the11 numbers, if we could. The whole thing, if we move12 across we need it large enough to see. If we could now13 move over to the left. We'll start with the left side.14 Now, I just want to clarify the numbers. Now Mr.15 Q. DeFeo, you said you think this is an invalid study?16 Yes.17 A. I want to introduce the numbers on this study and18 Q. compare them to yours. It's the same forest, right?19 I'm sorry, say that again.20 A. It's the same forest, right?21 Q. The forest, the forest hasn't moved, but it's22 A. certainly evolved in whatever happened in 12 years and23 trees have died.24 Well, you testified several times already there25 Q. 36 was no major die off of trees through observation?1 Other than ash.2 A. Other than ash, right. As far as the rest of the3 Q. forest goes it's a stable forest at this point?4 Stagnant. You keep saying stable, I'll tell you5 A. it's stagnant.6 But no major die off as you testified, correct?7 Q. Except for ash.8 A. Whatever trees were noted, other than say bore9 Q. ash as an occasionally casualty, in 2007 and 2010, they10 should still be there today, all though may have grown11 bigger, fair to say?12 Possibly. I have no way of knowing.13 A. Well, you said there was no major die off on this14 Q. site, so the trees that were there in that period15 probably are still there today, isn't that fair to say?16 Again, I have no way of knowing. I haven't seen17 A. individual trees. You're asking me to be clairvoyant18 and telling you what the exact trees are in a given plot19 on a map that's statistically invalid.20 I didn't ask you about exact trees in any map. I21 Q. simply said to you, if it's true as you said that22 there's been no major die back of trees on this site23 over the last decades --24 Other than bore ash.25 A.