June 30, 2025, Planning Board Special Meeting Transcript - WEHI

08/07/2025 02:56:42 PM Page 133 to 136 of 175 34 of 70 sheets 133 maintained by Essex Fells. The road is closed except1 when it's necessary for us to assist West Orange for2 police or fire activity. We actually had an, in April3 of this year a need to get to West Orange, we got a fire4 call basically in the fire department, they came in as5 fire EMS Essex Fells on Oval Road, it turned out it was6 actually in West Orange on Oval Road so we had to get7 through that gate, provide mutual aid to West Orange,8 eventually turn that scene over to West Orange. Because9 the road is blocked we couldn't access it that way, West10 Orange Fire Department came from Eagle Rock Avenue, the11 other side of Oval Road. My concern, given the flood12 water impact I see today in that area, is if that area13 is washed out, if it's, if all of a sudden it's a storm14 and the water continues to collect and it gets worse we15 will not have the ability to provide mutual aid to West16 Orange, unless we go all the way around. We're going to17 take a significant amount of time, it's not good for us,18 not good for West Orange. You're eliminating an19 emergency access that's there for a reason.20 I can only talk about Essex Fells residents,21 we're the immediate neighbor as I mentioned, down hill,22 down the stream from you, my view is certainly this23 board, you should look into this. You should consider24 what you're doing and what you're sending our way. If25 134 you look in the area there are examples, including1 Verona, North Caldwell, The Hill Top Development on2 Bloomfield Avenue, look how Bloomfield Avenue floods3 today. Right. When that property was improved nobody4 did adequate investigation to protect residents from the5 flooding. So what goes on. Well, that entire area now6 has to be redeveloped by Caldwell. Right. Flood7 protection --8 MR. PLOCKER: I'm going to object. He's9 referencing off-site properties. We have this10 application, we have a stormwater plan, we have11 professionals testify, We Care had professionals12 testify, but I think we're getting kind of outside the13 scope of this application.14 MR. AFRAN: Actually, we're not. The15 applicants planner last week, Mr. McDonough,16 acknowledged that the MLUL requires analysis in land use17 matters of impacts on neighboring municipalities and the18 gentleman, being a Mayor of the neighboring19 municipality, is doing

McDonough,16 acknowledged that the MLUL requires analysis in land use17 matters of impacts on neighboring municipalities and the18 gentleman, being a Mayor of the neighboring19 municipality, is doing exactly what the MLUL want's, so20 it's relevant.21 MR. PLOCKER: And he's testifying about how22 he thinks this job may impact Essex Fells. Now we're23 talking about other jobs. Past situations outside of24 Essex Fells, outside this property.25 135 MR. AFRAN: The witness is not limited to1 only his municipality. He's a Mayor and in that2 capacity has interactions with Mayor's and governing3 body's of all sorts of communities. Just as it's4 relevant under the MLUL that there would be impact on5 Essex Fells, he has knowledge of impacts on other6 neighboring communities, that's relevant to this plan.7 It's exactly what the legislation wanted when it created8 that provision in the MLUL. That we need to take into9 account when we zone and when we consider applications10 under the zoning ordinance the impact on neighboring11 municipalities. It's directly relevant.12 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: I think it's directly13 relevant to the Mayor of Essex Fells. He should speak14 to Essex Fells and if there are Mayor's for other15 communities they can also testify, but we're moving16 outside the scope of expertise of the Mayor, so I would17 ask you to just focus on Essex Fells.18 THE PUBLIC: I was going to say one thing,19 I'm not testifying as an expert on Caldwell or other20 towns, I'm testifying in general, but we're all public21 officials, right. We have an obligation to understand22 the reality. I have heard, I sat through most of these23 meetings, I have heard repeatedly reference to24 stormwater, that's the DEP problem. The reality is,25 136 yes, in part the DEP has responsibility, my point to you1 as is the same thing I would do if I was uphill from2 West Orange and you guys were coming before me, I would3 not say, I wouldn't have to consider it. What I'm4 saying is, do not assume that basically someone else is5 going to look at what I'm talking about and the impact6 on the public, including me. Right. As the one Morris7 community. I understand we're not West Orange8 residents, I'm not a West Orange resident, but the9 impact has to be taken into account on our residents, so10 what I'm saying is do not ignore this. Do not off-load11 this to the DEP because we have seen plenty of

not a West Orange resident, but the9 impact has to be taken into account on our residents, so10 what I'm saying is do not ignore this. Do not off-load11 this to the DEP because we have seen plenty of examples12 as public officials where the DEP is not going to save13 anybody in two years once this thing gets built, so14 that's your job, right. That's my job in my community,15 that's your job here. So all I'm asking is that you16 take notice of that, you make this applicant prove to17 you to your satisfaction that these things are taken18 into account and there will not be an impact of a19 negative nature. It's a problem today. You know the20 problems going to get worse. Hold this applicant to21 that test and please protect my community and your own22 community, as well as Verona and other neighbors,23 adequately. You know the problem exists. Thank you.24 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you, Mayor.25

35 of 70 sheets Page 137 to 140 of 175 08/07/2025 02:56:42 PM 137 MR. AFRAN: I have one question. I have one1 quick question. One or two questions.2 When you attended the scene at Oval Road3 when the tree blocked the road, I believe that was the4 incident, how long, in your knowledge as a member of the5 public, how long did the road remain blocked until that6 incident cleared?7 THE PUBLIC: Roughly, I was personally at8 the scene, I was on the first engine that was there, I9 was there about half and hour. From my understanding10 after I left, the scene, there was a fire, brush fire11 caused by wires coming down and a tree coming down, so I12 believe it was approximately two hours is what I was13 told until that scene was opened by PSE&G. There could14 have been additional work, that's how long it took15 minimum for traffic to get through.16 MR. AFRAN: Thank you.17 That's all I have.18 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you.19 MR. AFRAN: Thank you, Mayor.20 THE PUBLIC: Thank you.21 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Mayor, do you have any22 questions?23 MAYOR McCARTNEY: Not at the moment -- yes,24 I do.25 138 Thank you, Mayor Davis. The one about1 emergency access, we discussed the emergency access on2 Howell Drive, but have not necessarily discussed this3 emergency access, this is the first hearing about the4 emergency access in Canoe Brook.5 THE PUBLIC: Yeah.6 MAYOR McCARTNEY: I'm not familiar with any7 other emergency access.8 MR. PLOCKER: I can represent it's been9 there for quite some time and it's not part of this10 application.11 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: By the golf course over to12 Essex Fells.13 MAYOR McCARTNEY: Is that --14 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: I'm sorry.15 MAYOR McCARTNEY: -- emergency access that16 Mayor Davis brought up? This was the first time I'm17 hearing that. I didn't realize it's not part of this18 application. But is that something that we should as a19 board consider?20 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: We'll talk about that.21 MAYOR McCARTNEY: Thank you.22 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Mr. Klein?23 MR. KLEIN: So Mr. Davis -- Mayor Davis, you24 said a couple times, conditions will get materially25 139 worse, and you talked about water.1 THE PUBLIC: I'm talking about stormwater2 primarily, but I'm also talking about indirect effects3 on current drinking water and that concern that we all4 draw from.5 MR. KLEIN: What do you base your opinion on6 that it's going to materially be worse?7 THE PUBLIC: Well, because

ut indirect effects3 on current drinking water and that concern that we all4 draw from.5 MR. KLEIN: What do you base your opinion on6 that it's going to materially be worse?7 THE PUBLIC: Well, because I'm downhill and8 water runs downhill. It's bad now, basically the9 infrastructure that's there both in West Essex and West10 Orange, by the way, I've seen both sides of the11 detention pond, I believe it was when the condos were12 developed in West Orange. That infrastructure, that13 amount of water coming from West Orange alone is at the14 top of the culvert, right. I mean, there's zero excess15 capacity in addition the water from Essex Fells is16 coming down Oval Road and drains to the Canoe Brook in17 the other direction, that's hitting a wall of water18 that's coming from West Orange. Everything is backing19 up in Essex Fells. That's what's taking out our sewer20 uplift station. So right now, as I mentioned, three21 years ago one set of improvements already under existing22 conditions, stormwater impact is so great that the23 existing infrastructure is inadequate.24 Second improvement is budgeted, we haven't25 140 done the work yet, but we need to reenforce, that's the1 $200,000 figure I mentioned to you, the existing2 infrastructure because back up the water from West3 Orange. There is nobody, and I'd be happy to kind of4 talk through whatever expert you have, there's nobody on5 this dais or in Essex Fells that doesn't expect that6 water to get worse. You can put impervious coverage,7 you're cutting down massive amounts for forest, the8 stormwater and you had expert testimony before you, the9 stormwater is going to materially worse. I can't give10 you an exact figure, but come on. Look at Hill Top,11 look around us. Look at the hill and the topography12 where we are located. Stormwater's overflowing the13 banks 150 yards today, what do think it's going to be14 when you put this up there.15 MR. KLEIN: So Mr. MacNeill, I'm going to16 ask you. Does that statement make sense to you, that17 the drainage, the stormwater conditions will be18 materially worse after this development is built?19 MR. MacNEILL: So that is definitely, I20 think, subjective a bit. So I will say this. The21 applicant, from our review as well as DEP's review, has22 complied with the four major prongs of stormwater23 management as outlined in N.J.A.C. 7.8, which is the24 state code for

will say this. The21 applicant, from our review as well as DEP's review, has22 complied with the four major prongs of stormwater23 management as outlined in N.J.A.C. 7.8, which is the24 state code for stormwater management and that's runoff25

08/07/2025 02:56:42 PM Page 141 to 144 of 175 36 of 70 sheets 141 quantity, runoff quality, groundwater recharge as well1 as drain infrastructure. So they have met the standard2 for water and quality. So for quantity they have to3 reduce to each point of analysis. The design has been,4 it has been prepared to meet the runoff quantity as5 outlined by DEP under N.J.A.C. 7.8.6 MR. KLEIN: So things will get slightly7 better if not stay the same?8 MR. MacNEILL: What they will do is they'll9 mitigate the impact by reducing their peek runoff.10 MR. KLEIN: Okay.11 MR. MacNEILL: So really what happens in12 stormwater is, with the impact of additional impervious13 coverage, there will be more volume. But what the state14 puts out in their regulations, the basins on-site slows15 the rate of runoff. So they hold water on this site and16 let it leave the site at 50 percent rate of the two year17 storm, 75 percent of the 10-year storm, and 80 percent18 of the 100-year storm. So really what that's saying is19 if in current conditions you're at 10 cubic feet per20 second in the two year storm, they are required to hold21 that back to 5 cubic feet per second, which based on our22 review it appears they have complied with that23 requirement.24 MR. KLEIN: Okay.25 142 So I think you sent a letter in a long time1 ago, the beginning of this, that your engineer looked at2 this and didn't agree with that?3 THE PUBLIC: You're referring to something4 else.5 MR. AFRAN: Our engineer testified and with6 respect to your engineer said that the applicant is7 wrong and they calculated incorrectly and there will be8 flooding. Now, I realize DEP has done it's end of it as9 the engineer said, but you evidence before you from an10 expert who says they have not calculated it correctly11 and here are the reasons and Mr. Walsh was very detailed12 and so you are not obligated necessarily to rubber stamp13 it because he said something. You have an expert who14 gave very, very detailed and considered explanations as15 to why flooding will get worse.16 MR. PLOCKER: We're getting into legal17 argument here. The neighbor testified this is his18 observation.19 MR. AFRAN: I'm not required to sit here20 like a wallflower when the engineer refers to DEP --21 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: You, never do.22 MR. AFRAN: Well, that's my point. The23 point is, if the engineer says DEP said this, I am24 entitled to remind you

a wallflower when the engineer refers to DEP --21 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: You, never do.22 MR. AFRAN: Well, that's my point. The23 point is, if the engineer says DEP said this, I am24 entitled to remind you of the evidence.25 143 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Mr. Afran, for the public,1 the board heard all parties and we will take all sources2 into consideration, including all the experts testimony.3 Thank you.4 THE PUBLIC: I would in response to the5 engineers comments, I keep hearing the same reference to6 many hearings which you guys were patient enough to sit7 through about the applicants met the burden under the8 law. I disagree and the burden, you know, can anybody9 on this dais explain, and I told you the existing10 conditions, right. You could give me credit, whatever11 credibility you'd like. 150 year storm today you're12 going tell me that what's the impact is going to be13 reduced. Really. Is that credible from your own14 engineer. If not how much worse is it going to get?15 That's a great question. That's something that you16 should get your own experts or get the developer to17 testify to precisely and, again, do not outsource this18 to the DEP, assuming they did their job, because my19 belief based on personal experience, what I have done20 through the DEP and what I've seen here, the answer is21 they have not discharged that obligation. You have22 independent obligations to the DEP you should satisfy.23 MR. KLEIN: Are you an engineer?24 THE PUBLIC: I am not testifying as an25 144 expert. I made that very clear.1 MR. KLEIN: You said they don't meet -- our2 engineer said they're going to reduce the runoff for the3 two year by 50 percent, 75 percent for the 5 and you're4 saying no.5 THE PUBLIC: He's saying that's the rule.6 MR. KLEIN: And they met the four prongs and7 they met the rule on your review, not DEPs review, your8 review?9 MR. MacNEILL: Yes, on my review. On our10 letter we did have concerns about some of the soil11 testing that Princeton Hydro brought up, but to mitigate12 that and something we discussed previously at one of13 these meetings was they're required to do soil testing14 during and post construction to verify the submitted15 soil testing that we had reviewed. So what they16 submitted was the seasonal high water table is 10-feet17 higher than what their geotechnical engineer certified,18 then they will have to address that in

l testing that we had reviewed. So what they16 submitted was the seasonal high water table is 10-feet17 higher than what their geotechnical engineer certified,18 then they will have to address that in construction.19 They will have a stop work order for construction and if20 the seasonal high water table is 10-feet higher than21 their design they will have to stop and address it with22 -- by stormwater design that would have to be approved23 by DEP as well as our office. So if at this point all24 we could do is review soil testing. Right. Everything25

37 of 70 sheets Page 145 to 148 of 175 08/07/2025 02:56:42 PM 145 that I have reviewed on the soil testing, yes, I do have1 similar concerns with the discrepancy that Princeton2 Hydro indicated. But on top of that it would be3 reverified again in construction as well as post4 construction. And if there are any issues with that5 certified testing it will be addressed by the applicant6 during construction as well as verified again post7 construction.8 MR. PLOCKER: And we agree with that.9 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: So Mr. MacNeill, you are10 saying on the record that there are milestones that will11 be observed in order to make sure that not only Essex12 Fells but Vernona remains safe and that these issues the13 Mayor brought up are mitigated?14 MR. MacNEILL: Exactly. So after board15 approval during construction you still have to comply16 with all local state and federal regulations for17 construction. And one of the big parts of that is the18 construction of the stormwater BMPs. And you will see19 in any municipality there's failing basins. Right. So20 DEP has required the soil testing to avoid failures in21 basins. This will be reviewed multiple times in22 construction and after construction. We will have site23 inspectors on-site while they're excavating, while24 they're backfilling, while they're placing infiltration25 146 basins in the sand layer, while they're compacting.1 There is multiple levels of soil testing as well as soil2 testing inspections that will be completed to ensure the3 initial design is followed in construction and post4 construction.5 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Mr. Afran.6 MR. AFRAN: Can I ask the engineer a7 question.8 If you have concerns similar to that of9 Princeton Hydro, at this stage wouldn't it be prudent10 for these tests to be done before the board approves the11 plan, rather than waiting until after significant work12 has been done with intangible outcomes?13 MR. MacNEILL: I will reiterate, DEP14 reviewed all submitted soil testing and, again, DEP15 writes these regulations for soil testing requirements.16 DEP has reviewed everything that has been submitted and17 has issued permits to the applicant.18 MR. AFRAN: I understand that, but as an19 engineer you are equally capable.20 MR. MacNEILL: I am comfortable, as the21 board engineer, allowing the applicant to move forward22 in construction and completing soil construction during23 post