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

al went there and22 A. figured out what the grades were and documented it and I23 looked at it and simple math. 211 feet. And that's,24 think about how tall is a high-rise building. That's in25 75 the neighborhood of what that would be and now you're1 adding a building on top of that and you got to get2 water up there. How you going to do it.3 And that's derived from the -- I have no further4 Q. questions.5 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you.6 (Whereupon, a short recess is taken.)7 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Ladies and gentlemen here8 and on zoom, we're back on the record. Thank you.9 Ms. Kapferer has a question for Mr.10 MacNeill.11 MS. KAPFERER: Thank you, Chairman.12 Mr. MacNeill, I'm wondering, are you able to13 share a bit about what degree of planning or due14 diligence --15 THE PUBLIC: Could you speak louder.16 MS. KAPFERER: Sure.17 Just curious if you could provide some18 information for like a typical, what would be the level19 of due diligence of planning that would be required for20 water and sewer?21 MR. MacNEILL: Yes, absolutely. So22 typically, every developers different, but typically a23 good developer would potentially build the stormwater24 sewer the city would provide. It's not, again, that's25 76 not a requirement at the board level, but at the board1 level in most cases applications do not have water and2 sewer service approvals before a Planning Board hearing.3 Any potential approvals for a development application4 would include a condition of approval for outside agency5 approvals, that would include water and sewer service6 approval. So that is absolutely going to be any, if we7 get to that point, would be a condition of approval for8 this application. That they have to obtain all outside9 agency approvals prior to getting to resolution10 compliance. So if the applicant cannot obtain water and11 sewer service through approval, the resolution would12 expire in two years and they'd have to come back to the13 board for either time extension or re-approval of the14 application.15 MS. KAPFERER: Thank you.16 MR. AFRAN: Mr. Chairman, I would just note17 --18 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Mr. Afran.19 MR. AFRAN: I would note as a legal point to20 the great extent to the boards engineer, obviously it's21 correct that approvals of other agencies are always a22 condition of approval. However, the law, and this comes23 from Field v. Franklin Township and a series of

the boards engineer, obviously it's21 correct that approvals of other agencies are always a22 condition of approval. However, the law, and this comes23 from Field v. Franklin Township and a series of other24 cases, and we'll get to that at the right point, makes a25

09/16/2025 06:29:53 AM Page 77 to 80 of 130 20 of 33 sheets 77 distinction between conditions of approval for --1 conditions of approval that require approvals of other2 agencies and the failure to include the essential3 elements of the utility water, sewage, etc., in the4 development application. Even though one needs to get5 approval from those other agencies as a condition of6 this approval the law still requires this board must7 have before it the actual plan for those fundamental8 functions. And so there's a distinction in the law.9 Yes, you need to get approval from the sewage authority,10 DEP, whoever it may be, but the board can't approve an11 application if it does not have those actual plans laid12 out. And that's the distinction that comes from Field13 v. Franklin Township and a series of other cases, and14 we'll brief it, you know, if necessary, but we'll have15 more argument on it, but that's our position legally and16 it is the law.17 MR. MacNEILL: Mr. Chairman, if I can18 respond to that.19 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Mr. MacNeill.20 MR. MacNEILL: The plans -- the last21 revisions for the plans dated October 28, 2024, do in22 fact show sewer service lines as well as water service23 lines as well as a proposed pump station on the plans.24 They also call out an extension of the water main from25 78 Kuzic Drive. So I would, based on that information, I1 do believe they have adequate water and sewer design for2 a board approval decision or board decision I'll say.3 MR. AFRAN: Actually, I -- the engineer for4 the applicant made it clear in his testimony that those5 connections were not known at this time. And in6 addition it's not enough to do what the engineer just7 described. The case law requires the feasibility of8 these plans to be shown to this board. It's not enough9 to say well, we think we could do a connection up here,10 someday we'll write that on the plan. One has to show11 the feasibility of using that connection. For example,12 if there's no flow capacity left on other pipes you13 can't just say well, we think we can tie into that, that14 satisfies our duties. The case laws very clear, the15 applicant must show the actual feasibility of what he16 suggested. So with respect, I can't say that I have a17 photographic memory of the latest version the engineer18 referred to, but merely showing well, we may be able to19 hook up here and we may be able

ggested. So with respect, I can't say that I have a17 photographic memory of the latest version the engineer18 referred to, but merely showing well, we may be able to19 hook up here and we may be able to put something here,20 doesn't address the feasibility. The actual details of21 how these will work have to be presented and they22 haven't been. And that's the distinction that the23 Appellate Division has made, that it's not enough to say24 well, we think we can hook up here, maybe we'll do the25 79 association system if we have to. You have to show that1 you can use to those things. That there's sufficient2 capacity, that there's sufficient capacity in the water3 system. What source will give you those 73 gallons a --4 thousand gallons a day. You can just say well, we think5 we --6 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Okay. Get to your point.7 MR. AFRAN: So that's the point. The8 feasibility is the clear condition required there.9 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: We understand.10 Mr. Plocker.11 MR. PLOCKER: Mr. Afran is conflating our12 engineers testimony with the testimony of the witness13 here today. There was testimony about what the town14 system looks like off-site, that is not part of this15 application. Do we absolutely need to figure that out16 and get somebody to sign off on our TWA and get approval17 from the DEP. 100 percent. But he is conflating with18 what is shown on the site plan with other issues that19 were testified to previously.20 MR. AFRAN: Actually, I'm not conflating.21 It's not enough to say we someday can hook up there we22 think.23 MR. PLOCKER: That's not what we're saying.24 MR. AFRAN: You actually have to show not25 80 that you think you can get approvals later, you have to1 show this board how it will work.2 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: We're going to leave --3 MR. AFRAN: Feasibility's the test.4 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: -- this to Mr. MacNeil,5 our engineer, to come back and let us know where on the6 scale of it is. If it's there or it's not there, where7 we are with that.8 MR. AFRAN: We're going to another time and9 we also will make --10 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Yes.11 MR. AFRAN: -- a legal argument when we need12 to.13 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Yes. Thank you.14 Public comment -- I'm sorry. Questions.15 MR. AFRAN: Could I just ask, I'm sorry.16 Could I just ask Mr. Fagan, I hooked up the witness with17 the portable mic, I just want to know if it's working.18 I don't normally hook people up with

ns.15 MR. AFRAN: Could I just ask, I'm sorry.16 Could I just ask Mr. Fagan, I hooked up the witness with17 the portable mic, I just want to know if it's working.18 I don't normally hook people up with mics.19 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Do any members of the20 public have any questions for Mr. Green on his21 testimony? Please come up and give your name and ask a22 question.23 Come up right up. Remember, questions are24 if, when, what, where, how and it's got to be focused on25

21 of 33 sheets Page 81 to 84 of 130 09/16/2025 06:29:53 AM 81 his testimony.1 Take your time.2 THE PUBLIC: Hi there. It's Barbara White,3 I live on Howell Drive and I've come asking for some4 sympathy.5 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Go right ahead. Would you6 like to sit down?7 THE PUBLIC: No. No.8 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Because you can hold the9 mic while sitting.10 THE PUBLIC: No. PT says I need exercise.11 So actually my question is to get a better12 understanding of the things you talked about. You13 talked very particularly about the need for water or14 sewer power and in your professional experience, how do15 you get things like that to a mountain top? Again,16 trying to get an understanding from the bare bones, you17 know, exactly where would the water tower be placed?18 THE WITNESS: The water tower would be19 placed as high on the mountain as the engineer sees is20 feasible.21 MR. AFRAN: I'm sorry, the complaints are22 Mr. Green can't be heard. You may want to hold that.23 THE WITNESS: Is that any better?24 THE PUBLIC: I can hear you. It's folks25 82 back there and this side.1 THE WITNESS: The water has to be pumped up2 the hill and up to whatever tower tank is designed to3 take care of water supply. And the reason I say they4 need a tank, is because you need to have a source of5 water that's reliable even if the pumps fail. Okay.6 The pumps could fail, lightning strikes knock out the7 power to the pumping system and now you're relying on8 that for pressure, you have nothing.9 THE PUBLIC: I understand that. Because --10 THE WITNESS: Okay. So that's why it, I say11 -- at least you didn't fall.12 So that's why I say some kind of a water13 tank/tower has to be included to provide that safety,14 for both drinking water and fire protection. You're15 going to have some kind of system in the building which16 would be sprinklers most likely and they need pressure.17 You can't, you need a sufficient amount of pressure for18 them to work. Okay. And the fire hydrants, and the19 fire hydrants are going to take a thousand gallons a20 minute. That's a lot of water. Okay. So we don't take21 care of this you're going to have another California22 mess.23 THE PUBLIC: Okay.24 So I could relate to that because I live in25 83 a house on Howell and I can't take showers with1 sprinklers or anything else with pressure pumps.2 THE WITNESS: Exactly. You have what's3 called a booster pump.4 THE

ate to that because I live in25 83 a house on Howell and I can't take showers with1 sprinklers or anything else with pressure pumps.2 THE WITNESS: Exactly. You have what's3 called a booster pump.4 THE PUBLIC: Booster pump, eight or nine5 hours the other day and back, you know, that was with6 the sprinkler.7 THE WITNESS: Because they didn't design the8 water system in your neighborhood well enough.9 THE PUBLIC: And literally across the woods10 from the subject property and already have --11 THE WITNESS: You just proved my case.12 THE PUBLIC: Yeah. And the waters supplied13 by Verona.14 So I also understand from you, you mentioned15 cooling towers, and where would they be located?16 THE WITNESS: Okay. To cool all these --17 there's 500 facilities counting the clubhouse and all18 that, just taking a nominal, let's say two tons per19 unit, which maybe on the shy side, but you got a20 thousand tons. A thousand tons to cool, you need a21 cooling tower which is rather large and it's going to be22 outside either on top of a building or on top of it's23 own pedestal with pipes running to and from. Okay.24 There may be one big tower if they centralize it, maybe25 84 four smaller towers for each building. I don't know,1 I'm not designing this facility. I'm just saying, in2 order to heat and cool, these are the things that would3 need to be provided and I didn't see anything along4 those lines in the plans. I think that's something that5 should be addressed.6 THE PUBLIC: So if we're to understand in7 your professional opinion it's really the magnitude of8 things obviously, you know, how big or how tall the9 tower might be, but you did also mention there was a six10 megawatt power supply, is that then sort of the standard11 based on the size?12 THE WITNESS: I estimated how much power each13 unit would have and multiplied it by 500 and got six14 megawatts. I mean, it could be, you know, five, it15 could be ten.16 THE PUBLIC: Is that something that's17 normally done through like one power station or18 multiple? Again, this is my understanding of how you --19 THE WITNESS: Well, you got these big grid20 lines that's very high voltage. That high voltage comes21 down a substation which breaks that down with22 transformers to lower voltage because your house comes23 in at 240, you know, it doesn't come in at 10,000. So24 the electrical company puts in a facility to take it25

09/16/2025 06:29:53 AM Page 85 to 88 of 130 22 of 33 sheets 85 from 10,000, whatever the high voltage is, down to what1 the neighborhood needs. There has to be a facility for2 that somewhere.3 THE PUBLIC: Okay.4 So I'm understanding there was a question of5 would we have the right facilities, would it carry6 enough power and would we be able have a backup system7 if this facility gets built so in the event of a power8 failure that people would still have sufficient water to9 operate or have fire suppression, etc.10 THE WITNESS: Well, the electric company11 takes care of that. I can't, you know, testify to what12 they might do. You could very well have an outage. We13 have them all the time.14 THE PUBLIC: My power was out because of --15 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you very much.16 THE PUBLIC: I'm done. Thank you very much.17 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Do any other members of18 the public have any questions for Mr. Green on his19 testimony?20 THE PUBLIC: Good evening. Seth Weisleder,21 Howell Drive.22 Mr. Green, thank you for your testimony. I23 have a question.24 We're using a lot of acronyms, would you25 86 please just tell me what RSIS is and what it means to a1 project like this?2 THE WITNESS: It stands for Residential Site3 Improvement Standards. These were developed by the4 state for all municipalities, it overrides all the local5 ordinances that builders were asked to try and figure6 out how to build here and there. All the towns have7 their own standards and the builders were clueless as8 what do without a separate study every time. Now they9 have one common standard that they have to follow and10 that's the RSIS.11 THE PUBLIC: And some of those standards12 include some of the things you were testifying on this13 evening?14 THE WITNESS: Most of the them, yes.15 THE PUBLIC: What else does it include, can16 you name a couple other things?17 THE WITNESS: Yeah, the other testimony my18 partner Al is going to speak on covers a lot of those19 and has to do with the design of the roads, the20 sidewalks, ADA requirements. I'm not sure if that's in21 there, but there's a lot. There are other requirements22 mostly -- the traffic requirement speaks to how many23 units you can put in the neighborhood, which is a24 cul-de-sac. And it's limited and it's is a lot smaller25 87 than what they have. A lot smaller. And you already1 got a cul-de-sac there with 300 homes on the same

put in the neighborhood, which is a24 cul-de-sac. And it's limited and it's is a lot smaller25 87 than what they have. A lot smaller. And you already1 got a cul-de-sac there with 300 homes on the same Warner2 Road which is more than the RSIS allows. So you got a3 major problem. You got existing traffic and now you're4 trying to add more traffic. So that's one the major5 things that governs.6 THE PUBLIC: Thank you. Sounds like it7 covers a few things. I guess my question is if it's a8 standard --9 THE WITNESS: It's 152 pages long.10 THE PUBLIC: So that's a standard that the11 state has for developers?12 THE WITNESS: Yes.13 THE PUBLIC: Does it have to be compliant to14 a Planning Board before approval or after approval? I15 mean if -- so these are the standards that the state --16 THE WITNESS: It has to be in the application17 that's being reviewed. The professionals over here18 should be looking at the application and seeing if the19 RSIS has been adhered to. I assume they've done that,20 that's what we do in the townships that we service as21 engineers.22 THE PUBLIC: So, yeah. I'm just trying to23 understand. So applications, again, I'm not a planning24 board member or -- I'm learning all this sitting here as25 88 a member of the public.1 THE WITNESS: Right.2 THE PUBLIC: So it has to be RSIS compliant3 before going to a planning board or after? What is the4 practice, I guess.5 THE WITNESS: Before. It should be in the6 plan because the professionals are looking to see if you7 comply with the thing. With the RSIS. You don't do it8 later.9 THE PUBLIC: So if it does -- yeah, if it10 does are you saying --11 THE WITNESS: You don't put promises in the12 thing and say I'm going to DO this, I'm going to do13 that. Well, how you going to do it. That's what they14 need to know.15 THE PUBLIC: Okay.16 So is the applicant -- is this compliant to17 RSIS standards as presented today or not compliant?18 THE WITNESS: The things I raised, in my19 opinion, are not compliant.20 THE PUBLIC: So you're saying there's21 deficiencies?22 THE WITNESS: Absolutely.23 THE PUBLIC: And it's not compliant?24 THE WITNESS: Yes, not compliant.25

23 of 33 sheets Page 89 to 92 of 130 09/16/2025 06:29:53 AM 89 THE PUBLIC: And it shouldn't be in front of1 a planning board until it is compliant, is that what2 you're saying?3 THE WITNESS: Yes.4 THE PUBLIC: Okay. Thank you.5 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Okay. Your time is up.6 Thank you very much.7 Thank you, sir.8 Any other members of the public have9 questions?10 THE PUBLIC: Hi. Good evening. Maxine11 Bock, Bakley Terrace.12 So when our homes were built the developer13 put in the sewer lines that would handle 20 or 21 homes14 on our street. In your expertise would an additional15 500 homes that this developer is proposing, would the16 sewer lines that connect to Bakley be adequate to handle17 that?18 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: I'm sorry, he didn't19 testify to that and I don't think that his expertise is20 there. He was talking is there a connection. He's21 testifying is there a connection or is there not a22 connection.23 THE PUBLIC: Well, would the connection be24 adequate to hold it?25 90 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: That's a different1 question. He didn't testify to that.2 THE WITNESS: Somebody has to do that3 engineering design. I just don't see how it's going to4 be connected and I looked at the volume, it was like5 73,000 somewhat gallons and that just comes from how6 much water goes into the facility they assume that's7 going out.8 MR. PLOCKER: Mr. Chairman, he testified he9 wasn't aware of the connection.10 MR. AFRAN: No, he said specifically that11 he's looked at the plans and didn't see one. And I'd12 appreciate if Mr. Plocker would not editorialize the13 witnesses statement.14 MR. PLOCKER: I did not editorialize them.15 He said he didn't see one. I agree with that, maybe he16 should have looked closer, Bruce.17 MR. AFRAN: He didn't see one is not the18 same as saying he is not aware. The suggestion Mr.19 Plocker's making is that the witness doesn't know. The20 witness said he has reviewed the plans and does not see21 this in the plans.22 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Okay. We're arguing over23 semantics. He said he greed, he did not see a24 connection.25 91 MR. AFRAN: Thank you.1 THE PUBLIC: My concern was in addition to2 that when we first moved in, two days after we moved in3 our, what would you say, our sewer line collapsed.4 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Ma'am, you're testifying.5 So you may ask him a question about what he said.6 THE PUBLIC: My question was, because of7 that, I am concerned if