June 4, 2025, Planning Board Regular Meeting Transcript - WEHI

13 of 41 sheets Page 49 to 52 of 101 06/20/2025 06:55:03 AM 49 MR. MacNEILL: Okay. That's all I have for1 now.2 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Okay.3 Mayor McCartney.4 MAYOR McCARTNEY: I want to go back now,5 looking through my notes. I was listening to Sean6 Walsh's testimony back in February, looks like that was7 the question that I asked. The question I asked was,8 Mr. Walsh, you recommended additional basins to be added9 either deeper or wider, that's what I meant by having a10 overlay and it wasn't just this basin it was a whole11 stormwater management.12 MR. AFRAN: I'm sorry. I thought you meant13 overlay map. My apologies.14 MAYOR McCARTNEY: I meant the whole plan,15 not just Basin 1.16 THE WITNESS: My general view on the site17 like this is that these are difficult sites to develop.18 They tend to have high water tables. So even making the19 basin bigger isn't necessarily going to solve the20 problem. And I know I've pointed out some other issues21 that, if I remember right, I identified some problems22 with their calculations that under estimated the volume23 of water. So all those issues together make this a24 complicated site to design. And, again, key issue here,25 50 and Sean Walsh brought this up as well, is that getting1 the soil testing and description down accurately and2 that's why I pointed out it makes no sense the seasonal3 high water table can be below than the elevation of a4 wetland. It has to be higher. There's no mention of a5 fragipan in any of the soil borings. And in every soil6 series it described the fragipan and having those soils7 have a fragipan actually makes sense with the hydrology8 of the wetlands. Follows the surface groundwater flow9 paths, flows towards the wetlands stream line to have10 soil, estimated seasonal high water below the wetland to11 me indicates they missed that defining layer and the New12 Jersey DEP BMP manual requires that you identify that13 would be restrictive horizons in your soil testing.14 MAYOR McCARTNEY: So Chairman, again, going15 back to my notes here. That was one of the points that16 I actually have a condition here that more test pits be17 run and to recalculate.18 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: So I got another question19 based on what you just said. The DEP requires it and it20 wasn't provided, wouldn't they ask for it before they21 made a conclusion?22 THE WITNESS: Soil descriptions were23 provided for the basins.

19 based on what you just said. The DEP requires it and it20 wasn't provided, wouldn't they ask for it before they21 made a conclusion?22 THE WITNESS: Soil descriptions were23 provided for the basins. What I showed the Board24 tonight is how they fit in with the rest of the25 51 landscaping of the site. DEP tends to believe the1 applicant that those borings are correct. But in this2 case, just looking at that flow path from upland to a3 wetland it seems that their test pit investigation just4 doesn't make sense relative to where the wetlands are on5 this site. There should be gradient from the top of the6 ridge towards the wetland groundwater, surface water7 both flowing toward them. And that fragipan is the key8 element for anyone doing a test pit to identify.9 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Okay.10 MR. GUARINO: Mr. Guarino, do you have any11 questions of the witness?12 MR. GUARINO: Thank you, Chairman.13 Thank you for your presentation. I want to14 get a clarification. I know you were talking about15 chemical reactions, would those chemical reactions have16 any impact on the water flow percolation or result in17 any environmental impact?18 THE WITNESS: No. They're usually -- why19 wetlands, at least in part, they're important in20 transforming our receiving bodies like streams and21 basins. And they -- and it can convert it from a form22 that becomes like a gas. So there's anaerobic condition23 for value. A healthy functioning wetland is important24 for just reducing the amount downstream.25 52 MR. GUARINO: Okay. Thank you, sir.1 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.2 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Mr. Naborine, do you have3 any questions for the witness?4 MR. NABORINE: Not at this time, Chairman.5 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Mr. Alper, do you have any6 questions for the witness?7 MR. ALPER: I do. Thank you.8 Couple. First I want to make sure I have9 the phrasing right. You said the seasonal high water10 table was below the wetlands elevation?11 THE WITNESS: For those two basins.12 MR. ALPER: Right.13 And you also said the basin bottom is at a14 lower elevation?15 THE WITNESS: Correct.16 MR. ALPER: So when you were first saying17 that, I maybe misunderstood. I thought you basically18 were saying that, that was a design problem, that they19 designed the basin bottom to be lower but from what20 you're more recently presenting, I think I misunderstood21 and maybe you're saying it's a math issue and

t, that was a design problem, that they19 designed the basin bottom to be lower but from what20 you're more recently presenting, I think I misunderstood21 and maybe you're saying it's a math issue and they22 miscalculated the water. Is that -- is my understanding23 that to be right?24 THE WITNESS: I think that you're right on25