June 23, 2025 Planning Board Special Meeting Transcript - WEHI

07/19/2025 07:03:47 AM Page 29 to 32 of 52 8 of 21 sheets 29 designed to flow, function and operate safely,1 efficiently and comfortably. And there are multiple2 parts to that. Flow generally refers to the flow of3 traffic through the site. Parking capacity, the overall4 functionality of the site being designed in accordance5 with sound planning principles, most importantly the6 ordinance.7 So when you said flow, there was a lot more to8 Q. follow that word. So let me ask you just what flow9 means. Does it mean the movement of people, vehicles,10 seamless movement? What are you referring to when you11 say flow.12 I think it means all of the above. Of vehicular13 A. circulation, pedestrian circulation, movements14 throughout the site and through the buildings. The15 buildings are designed and in a sound manner. There16 will be a comfortable, nice place to live.17 Does it flow comfortably for pedestrians if you18 Q. can't walk on the sidewalk to leave the development?19 Again, I think there's good connectivity between20 A. where the vehicles would park between the units and the21 overall site.22 Is it good connectivity for people to walk out of23 Q. this development and go into the rest of the community?24 You mean to the south or to the north, outside of25 A. 30 the bounds of this?1 Well, assume the north is undeveloped you're not2 Q. going to walk across what's left of the forest. I mean3 south, because there's an association down there, 1004 houses, there's other things. Now, if people want to5 walk out of this development does this flow comfortably6 for the pedestrians when there are no sidewalks?7 Yes, I don't see, again, based on the testimony8 A. on the record, I don't see any substantial consequence9 with the way the pedestrian circulation system has been10 designed.11 MR. PLOCKER: I am going to object to the12 comment there are no sidewalks. We are seeking an13 exception from RSIS in one location for sidewalks on14 both sides of the street. But to make the statement15 that there are no sidewalks proposed is misleading.16 MR. AFRAN: I meant, and I think it was17 quite clear from the context, leaving the development18 there's no sidewalks. That's quite clear what I said.19 MR. PLOCKER: I don't know what leaving the20 development means.21 Can you walk out of this development and stay on22 Q. a sidewalk and go to the neighborhood below?23 MR. PLOCKER:

clear what I said.19 MR. PLOCKER: I don't know what leaving the20 development means.21 Can you walk out of this development and stay on22 Q. a sidewalk and go to the neighborhood below?23 MR. PLOCKER: Where?24 MR. AFRAN: To the neighborhood below.25 31 MR. PLOCKER: And where? Referencing1 sidewalks or lack of sidewalks.2 MR. AFRAN: I'll tell you what, if the3 witness has doubts about my question, it's meaning, the4 witness can ask. I'm now in the process of examining5 Mr. Plocker. I think we should stop and let me continue6 with the witness because there were some reasons why we7 wanted to be expeditious.8 May I continue?9 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Go right ahead.10 MR. AFRAN: Thank you.11 Now --12 Q. CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Mr. McDonough, if you13 don't understand a question or can't answer, the14 answers, I don't know.15 THE WITNESS: Understood, Mr. Chairman.16 MR. AFRAN: Yes. Mr. Plocker should not be17 saying he doesn't know before he says it.18 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Agreed.19 You said "The community has the right to create20 Q. zoning districts." That was actually a quote I took21 from the transcript.22 Yes.23 A. Now, by that you mean of course the community24 Q. under our state law has a right to zone and create25 32 zoning within the community?1 Yes.2 A. Now, the normal process, you would agree, would3 Q. be that someone proposes a zoning amendment, goes to the4 Planning Board for --5 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Mr. Afran, the zone plan6 -- move on. The zone plans in place, so move on. His7 understanding how it works is not relevant to the8 Planning Board.9 MR. AFRAN: Well, he did testify that the10 community has the right to create zoning districts. He11 was saying that this is was -- well, I'll go further.12 You would agree this is an unusual situation13 Q. where a lawsuit was filed by the developer and this14 zoning district was the product of a settlement in that15 case, isn't that correct?16 I would not agree with the phrase that this was17 A. unusual. This happens throughout New Jersey.18 That's not exactly the same as the council in19 Q. creating zoning, but rather here it did it under the20 threat of continued litigation?21 MR. PLOCKER: Objection.22 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: I got that. I don't know23 what happened. The Superior Court was the mediator,24 which is outside the purview of the Planning Board and25