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

06/20/2025 06:55:03 AM Page 5 to 8 of 101 2 of 41 sheets 5 of our witnesses. If we don't, that's fine, we'll talk1 later on.2 Mr. Plocker gestured, I think, we don't know3 yet.4 MR. PLOCKER: I didn't make any gesture.5 MR. AFRAN: I'm sorry.6 MR. PLOCKER: We'll have to get back to you.7 I know the test was done and, you know, but you and me,8 we're all busy, we'll have to check.9 MR. AFRAN: Fine. Okay.10 So in terms of planning witnesses, to some11 degree ours depend on that but we'll work through it the12 best wet can.13 So we have one witness tonight. I'll call14 Mark Gallagher.15 MS. McGOVERN: Please put your full name on16 the record and spell your last name.17 THE WITNESS: Mark Gallagher,18 G-A-L-L-A-G-H-E-R.19 MS. McGOVERN: Please raise your right-hand.20 Do you swear or affirm the testimony you are about to21 give will be the truth the whole truth nothing but the22 truth.23 THE WITNESS: I do.24 Ms. McGOVERN: Thank you.25 6 M A R K G A L L A G H E R, having been duly1 sworn under oath testifies as follows:2 I don't know if the people could hear me in the3 Q. back. I know there's, the air-conditioning is necessary4 but is it okay -- can you hear? I'll ask Mr. Gallagher5 to begin, I'll ask if he would speak up just because6 there is air-conditioning.7 Let me just qualify the witness.8 Mr. Gallagher has been sworn.9 Mr. Gallagher, who are you employed by presently?10 I am the president of Princeton Hydro.11 A. I think you may have to speak louder. You can12 Q. actually use this ultimately when I'm done.13 And what is your area or focus presently at14 Princeton Hydro?15 It's primarily regulatory compliance. Geological16 A. restoration.17 Geological restoration?18 Q. Correct.19 A. What is your degree in? What degrees do you20 Q. hold?21 I have a bachelor's degree in biology from22 A. Moravian College and a master's degree from Rutgers23 University.24 Now, I understand you also teach a course at25 Q. 7 Drexler or Temple?1 Temple University.2 A. And what course is that?3 Q. Wetlands Ecology.4 A. And how long have you taught that course for?5 Q. Eight years.6 A. MR. AFRAN: Without going further, I believe7 this would qualify the witness in his field of wetlands,8 ecology and hydrology. I could do more but I don't9 think it's necessary.10 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Everybody okay? Any Board11 members have a question.12 Let me ask you a question before we get

f wetlands,8 ecology and hydrology. I could do more but I don't9 think it's necessary.10 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Everybody okay? Any Board11 members have a question.12 Let me ask you a question before we get started.13 What area of the ordinance would his testimony apply to14 that the Panning Board can use to make their decision?15 Is this the body that should be hearing this16 information.17 MR. AFRAN: Well, it relates really in the18 same way to the prior witnesses who testified as to19 forest ecology, stormwater management and ornithology.20 And the principle is very simply, the Board has an21 expert, Mr. DeFeo, who was contracted to provide an22 environmental appraisal. The applicant signed a23 settlement agreement agreeing to submit it's site plan24 application to DeFeo for comment for -- as for25 8 environmental appraisal, and Mr. DeFeo testified1 pursuant to that. The settlement agreement is a2 mandatory part of this proceeding and therefore this is3 relevant to environmental evidence Mr. DeFeo gave. Now,4 he didn't cover a full range of these subjects as our5 witnesses are, and that's the point. He limited his6 discussion largely to deer fencing and the impact on7 regenerating the understory in the woods with deer8 fencing, but that's not all there is to an environmental9 appraisal. And since the applicant's required to10 undergo an environmental consultation with Mr. DeFeo,11 our point is there is substantial environmental harm and12 evidence to show that from the project and all that's13 relevant in the way that I described.14 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: I am going to ask Mr.15 MacNeill, our board engineer, who is paid -- our board16 engineer is paid for by the Planning Board. He is an17 independent person that looks at all sides, he is not18 involved with the applicant or the objectors. He is19 charged with looking at information that we present to20 him and coming back and saying this is your purview or21 it's the purview of another regulatory body. If it is22 not in the purview of the Planning Board to use that23 information in their decisions then it should be24 somewhere else. If, on the other hand, it is pertinent25