August 13 2025, Planning Board Special Meeting Transcript - WEHI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 51 THE WITNESS: Again, I can't answer that. I can tell you based on experience that the most critical time on this project is usually during construction. It's bare, it's still trying to stabilize the soils, so you would expect excessive runoff. That's why you have sedimentation basins, things of that nature. So it will definitely increase stormwater runoff. It's a matter how it's controlled during the project. THE PUBLIC: Thank you. Appreciate it. CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Anybody else? Come right up. THE PUBLIC: So going back to the whole issue of stabilization. You indicated that there is potential to stabilize the slope. Expensive, yes. Based on your experience and knowledge, have you run across instances where people were stabilizing a slope where the actual building was to be built on was this close to the edge of the slope? That's question number one. And then two, with anything you do, you build, there's always a possible of failure. I am curious, again, what you have seen or know of, have there been slope stabilization the type that you talked about that ultimately failed? THE WITNESS: No, I have not seen something

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 52 that would -- I have not seen a failure after something had been built. I've seen, anecdotally over in Watchung, Plainfield, you know, I was once overseeing a project for a geotechnical firm I was working for and the ground seemed they were filling the side slopes and the building had sloped and I happened to be -- looked a little funny like the machine was on jello and it was June and they started doing the test pit and excavation, they went down about 15-feet there was snow. My firm wasn't there to oversee the initial project, so I had to take the soil down. But I mean, those things could happen. You asked about adequate oversight and if it's designed, you know, the engineer that designs it has to pay close attention to the oversight construction. THE PUBLIC: So going back to my first question. Again, you may not have seen this in your experience but considering how little distance there is from the edge of that building to the slope, is it your opinion that there is even enough space in order to do appropriate remediation? Or is that doubtful. THE WITNESS: You have to do the work on the slope itself. I mean, that's not necessarily easy, it can be done. There's contractors out there that can do it. My recommendation last time was to move the building back. Move it way from the slope.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 53 THE PUBLIC: Thank you. CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Any other members of the public have questions? Please raise your hand and come up and be identified. Seeing none. Thank you very much. I'm sorry, Mr. Plocker. MR. PLOCKER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Goll. I just have a few questions. I won't be very long. I just want to make clear, in the slope study area is the applicant proposing disturbance on the actual slope? THE WITNESS: No. MR. PLOCKER: Okay. Does the applicant propose -- THE WITNESS: Well, depends -- I'm sorry. Depends if they're blasting. MR. PLOCKER: I just asked if there's going to be any proposed disturbance on the slope? THE WITNESS: You mean like going in and grading and doing tree clearing? MR. PLOCKER: Or building a building, any kind of disturbance? THE WITNESS: Well, they're building it up to the edge of the slope.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 54 MR. PLOCKER: What is the slope area that you studied in the report? THE WITNESS: Well, I looked at all four cross sections of that. Looked at the northeastern side of the building, so the slopes all along the eastern side of the building. MR. PLOCKER: Let me rephrase it and I'll refer to slithers for frame of reference. I'll refer to the zoning ordinance. The zoning ordinance for this particular property says that the east face of the Watchung Mountain shall remain undisturbed from the peak of the ridge line, except utility construction shall be permitted east of the ridge line. Is the applicant proposing any disturbance to the east of the peak of the ridge line? THE WITNESS: Yes. The grading plan, there's a big knob, there's two knobs on the building. They're putting the building right on top. MR. PLOCKER: It is your testimony that Building D violates the zoning ordinance? THE WITNESS: If -- I don't know the zoning ordinance side, but if that's the zoning ordinance they're in violation, yes. MR. PLOCKER: Okay. So there's actually a line -- so it's your

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 55 testimony that Building D violates the zoning ordinance? I just want to get that on the record. THE WITNESS: Like I said, I'm not going to state it violates the zoning ordinance, simply because I didn't look at the zoning ordinance. If you want me to take a took at the zoning ordinance -- MR. PLOCKER: Okay. MR. AFRAN: Yeah, I'm going to raise an objection because the witness is not a planner. He didn't speak to violations or zone codes. Simply spoke to the geotechnical questions and referred to the effects of blasting that would have impact -- CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Mr. Afran, the answers no. The answers no, I don't know. He can answer that. MR. AFRAN: Well, it's outside the scope of direct. CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Okay. MR. AFRAN: I mean, Mr. Plocker's trying to score points in a sense with a witness that didn't speak to that. CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Then the answers no. MR. AFRAN: You hear my objection for whatever it's worth. Thank you. THE WITNESS: Can I just clarify. CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Absolutely.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 56 THE WITNESS: The attorney, the applicants counsel gave me the definition, he explained it to me. Based on that interpretation what he's saying is they built on top of the ridge. The other thing is, I just remembered, the last meeting we looked at the concept that was approved for the settlement, the buildings east of that 150-feet. So it's not the same as the concept. CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Okay. MR. PLOCKER: All right. And the applicant strongly disagrees with that. It's not true and we'll clarify that. CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Okay. Mr. Afran. MR. PLOCKER: Talk about trying to score points. MR. AFRAN: I didn't say anything yet, how could I score points. CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Gentlemen. Gentlemen. It's been such a nice evening. MR. AFRAN: Thank you. I have no questions. CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Say nice things. MR. PLOCKER: What is the geological composition of the footprint of the proposed Building D?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 57 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. MR. AFRAN: Object to form. MR. PLOCKER: What's is the geology of the ground under the proposed Building D in the footprint? THE WITNESS: It is -- it's basically volcanic intrusion. It's basalt. MR. PLOCKER: Bedrock? THE WITNESS: I'm sorry? MR. PLOCKER: Any bedrock. THE WITNESS: Yes. Yeah, that's the definition of bedrock. MR. PLOCKER: Okay. I just wanted to make that clear. THE WITNESS: Not competent bedrock. Thank you. MR. PLOCKER: Just give me one moment, please. CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Sure. MR. PLOCKER: Mr. Goll, is your testimony that you believe that Langan didn't do enough testing on the slope, is that correct? THE WITNESS: Yes. MR. PLOCKER: Okay. But you also testified that geotechnical engineering is not an exact science, correct?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 58 THE WITNESS: Correct. MR. PLOCKER: Okay. So if you claim that not enough testing is done and that geotechnical engineering is not an exact science, then how can you make or form the opinion that the proximity of the homes represent a severe consequence of failure? THE WITNESS: Because the location of the proposed building adjacent to a steep slope that has rock quality that's not a high quality rock in a lot of locations would give me pause and I would want to do more investigation of that, of the condition of that slope, so I would recommend more borings. MR. PLOCKER: How many more borings? How many is enough. THE WITNESS: You'll have to ask Langan. MR. PLOCKER: But it's not an exact science, is it? THE WITNESS: It's actually engineering. MR. PLOCKER: It's not an exact science, that's your testimony? THE WITNESS: Well, there is -- well, it's not an exact science simply because as the factor of safety I described is there are so many different factors that you change between borings, the more

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 59 borings you have the better and if you have a, for example, critical infrastructure or a structure adjacent to let's say a really steep slope that has a potential for failure to hit a house downhill I would do more. MR. PLOCKER: All right. And correct me if I am wrong and I may be wrong, I am not trying to put words in your mouth. Did you testify at one point there was a specific point on the property in your analysis that had a point 79 factor of safety. Did I hear that correctly? THE WITNESS: That was downhill. It was a very -- it was an anomaly. MR. PLOCKER: So, but a point 79 would indicate a failure, correct? THE WITNESS: Well, we've gotten actually -- we've done slope stability and I said -- we've done a slope stability analysis where we had actually a factor of safety of less than one. It doesn't mean it's going to immediately fail, but it's -- there's an incipient potential for failure. MR. PLOCKER: Are you aware if there's been any failure? THE WITNESS: Where? MR. PLOCKER: Where you analyzed the point 79.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 60 THE WITNESS: No. MR. PLOCKER: Thank you. I have nothing else, and just for the record, our geotechnical engineer has reviewed Mr. Goll's testimony from his original hearing, they're going to review this testimony, they reviewed both reports and we will have no issue addressing any of the reports. CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you. Mr. Afran. MR. AFRAN: And we'll be happy to cross-examine that engineer at the appropriate time. CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you. MR. AFRAN: We have no further questions for Mr. Goll. CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you. Okay. Thank you very much, sir. THE WITNESS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Mr. Plocker, do you have anything else to say? MR. PLOCKER: I'm all saying out. CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you. Mr. Afran. We all have our things to do. MR. AFRAN: Thank you. I have very limited work to do right now but I need to just proffer some