December 3, 2025 Regular Meeting - WEHI Transcript

ablished.5 MS. McGOVERN: At the end of tonight we are6 going to take that from you and we are going to give it7 to our board secretary and have it copied.8 MR. AFRAN: Should we just mark it O-37?9 MS. McGOVERN: Right now, yes.10 So this the Langan Engineering Investigation Plan11 dated June 18, 2025. It would be marked as O-37 with12 markings by Mr. Kleinberg on it.13 THE WITNESS: Just to clarify, I think we14 attached this to our original report, this drawing.15 MR. AFRAN: Yes, but because Mr. Kleinberg16 made a mark I want to identify it separately. If you17 would be kind enough to write O-37 on the top.18 On Page 8 you make a statement that excavations19 Q. in rock to a depth of approximately 25 feet below the20 top of rock at the high point of the ridge, could lead21 to disturbance and weakening of the slope, particularly22 if blasting is used. In your understanding based on23 your review of the plans is there any way to build this24 without blasting at this stage?25 20 Yes, there are and I would -- they were described1 A. in the Langan report.2 Right.3 Q. Now, when would it be appropriate -- strike that.4 If one does not know if blasting is to be used5 and if there is no blasting plan provided, how would we6 be able to evaluate the likelihood of disturbance and7 weakening of the slope?8 We had recommended, we have a list of9 A. recommendations that the Planning Board set as10 requirements and one of those is to have an excavation11 work plan certified by an engineer retained by the12 contractor performing the work that would indicate the13 measures that would be taken to minimize the disturbance14 of the rock and to the slope, to provide provisions for15 support of the excavation and to do what you just asked16 about. And that there are experts, which I am not, that17 would be able to produce that and it should be a18 requirement that they do produce it.19 Well, without knowing if blasting is going to be20 Q. used and without seeing a blasting plan are you in a21 position to evaluate the degree which would be22 disturbance and weakening of the slope?23 That has to be done during the construction.24 A. Well, the blasting plan doesn't have to be done25 Q.

01/05/2026 02:58:16 PM Page 21 to 24 of 68 6 of 17 sheets 21 during the construction, that could be done?1 No, but then there has to be follow up with2 A. monitoring, with a monitoring program and evaluation by3 a geologist or geological engineer. And that, and that4 would be, if we were running the specifics for the job,5 that would be included in the work plan.6 Well, my question is a little different. It was7 Q. simply, without knowing if a blasting is going to be8 used and without seeing a blasting work plan, are you in9 a position to evaluate "disturbance and weakening" of10 the slope arising from the blasting?11 Well, I am not at this point in time, but this12 A. is, this is something that takes place later in the13 development of the project.14 MR. PLOCKER: May I. We already agreed to15 that.16 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: The applicant agreed to17 that.18 MR. AFRAN: That's very nice for the board19 to evaluate. Nice gesture.20 MR. PLOCKER: You would like this hearing to21 continue, I assume. This is a process that we take very22 seriously. It is done, as Mr. Kleinberg testified,23 during the construction phase. So are we going to get24 through Mr. Kleinberg's cross-examination with serious25 22 questions or are you going to continue to delay these1 proceedings, which clearly is your clients goal.2 MR. AFRAN: That comment really should be3 struck from the record. It's inappropriate.4 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Okay.5 Mr. Klein.6 MR. KLEIN: Mr. Kleinberg, I thought I heard7 somebody say several meetings ago that you can control8 the blast, you can have a certain amount of explosives,9 you can put a max on it so it's not going to disturb as10 far away, you may have to do a lot of smaller blasts as11 opposed to one big blast?12 THE WITNESS: Correct.13 MR. KLEIN: Okay. So to his question, is14 there no way that they can blast this without disturbing15 the neighbors or is there a way that they can blast it16 in smaller amounts and not disturb the neighbors?17 THE WITNESS: It can be done in a controlled18 manner in conjunction with other types of special rock19 splitting equipment.20 MR. KLEIN: Right.21 THE WITNESS: And line drilling. There's22 all kinds of procedures, but that's really the23 contractors generally and we would recommend that they24 be required to have a professional engineer certify a25 23 program.1 MR. KLEIN: Right. So knowing that, to his2 question -- say your

ally the23 contractors generally and we would recommend that they24 be required to have a professional engineer certify a25 23 program.1 MR. KLEIN: Right. So knowing that, to his2 question -- say your question again then.3 MR. AFRAN: That wasn't my question. I4 wasn't directing my question to disturbance of the5 neighbors. My question was different.6 MR. KLEIN: The slope.7 MR. AFRAN: Disturbance of the slope.8 MR. KLEIN: Excavating such a big blast even9 effected, I am saying smaller blasts.10 MR. AFRAN: We don't dismiss the impact on11 neighbors. Blasting, that's always an issue in managing12 construction projects. It's a very simple question,13 blasting could lead to disturbance and weakening of the14 slope. That's at Page 8 of the report. My question is15 very simple. Are you able to evaluate, sitting here16 right now without knowing if blasting is going to be17 used and without seeing a blast plan, what the level of18 disturbance and weakening of the slope will be, "yes" or19 "no"? Are you able to do that sitting here today20 without the blast plan.21 In my experience when they, when an experienced22 A. blaster is charged with doing his work to minimize23 disturbance it can be done. This takes place in24 Manhattan where there are buildings on the property25 24 line.1 And I will -- Mr. Kleinberg, let's go back to the2 Q. question I asked, which I now asked three times and has3 not been answered. It is a very simple question.4 Without knowing if blasting is going to take place and5 without seeing a blast plan are you, as the independent6 expert evaluating slope stability, right now able to7 evaluate what level of disturbance and weakening of the8 slope will take place, "yes" or "no"? Are you in a9 position to make that evaluation now without seeing a10 blast plan.11 Okay. If you're going to be, if you're going to12 A. discount the way, the way things are done in the13 construction industry, I can't tell you sitting here at14 this point in time, no. The answer is, no, I can't tell15 you.16 That's all I asked.17 Q. But I know it can be done.18 A. Lots of things can be done. This board has a19 Q. public safety duty to know whether a project will be20 safe for the public. I am simply asking, can you21 evaluate that issue right now?22 It can be done so that it will protect the23 A. public.24 We can go to Mars, that's not the question. Can25 Q.

7 of 17 sheets Page 25 to 28 of 68 01/05/2026 02:58:16 PM 25 you evaluate it right now sitting here today?1 No, I can't.2 A. That's all I want to know.3 Q. Not sitting here, but I know that it can be4 A. evaluated if I was tasked to do that.5 I understand.6 Q. And it wouldn't be something I can do in a7 A. five-minute interchange here, but it can be done.8 Well, you don't have a blast plan, you couldn't9 Q. do one right now no matter what, fair to say?10 Right. That's correct.11 A. Okay.12 Q. This is a Planning Board application. It's13 A. not --14 Mr. Kleinberg, there's no crime under New Jersey15 Q. law to simply answer yes or no. If a question calls for16 that please just --17 Yeah, but the answer tends to distort the18 A. picture.19 Well, that's your view.20 Q. If you just say "yes" or "no" it doesn't tell the21 A. whole story.22 I want ask you, can you evaluate the level of23 Q. risk disturbance and weakening of slope based on what24 you have in front of you right now?25 26 No.1 A. Thank you.2 Q. No.3 A. Thank you.4 Q. At Page 9 of your report you make the statement,5 "The principal jointing pattern indicated jointing with6 dip favorably downward into the slope and steep, nearly7 vertical joints." Now, are those the joints you were8 referring to last week when you said, infiltration could9 take place and cause ultimate instability?10 Those are parts of the system of joints, yes.11 A. Now, it then says, "Some of the exposed rock12 Q. showed a series of tight vertical cracks spaced as close13 as 1 or 2 inches."14 That's what we observed. They're not serious,15 A. they're very fine cracks.16 It says, I was quoting you, it said -- it says,17 Q. "A series of tight vertical cracks."18 Right, but they're not -- it's not unusual.19 A. Nothing unusual about the observation.20 In other words, not unusual on a ridge line to21 Q. have that?22 Right. In any type of a rock formation.23 A. Those cracks, those joints are what you're24 Q. referring to at the last meeting when you said water25 27 infiltration could cause rock --1 No, there might be wider cracks but not evidenced2 A. at the surface. There's very little rock exposed at the3 surface.4 Okay.5 Q. So when you said last week, you don't know if the6 joints are there, you were referring to internally in7 the rock?8 It's just a precaution.9 A. When you said last week that we don't know if the10 Q. joints are

u said last week, you don't know if the6 joints are there, you were referring to internally in7 the rock?8 It's just a precaution.9 A. When you said last week that we don't know if the10 Q. joints are there, that's because you can't yet see11 inside the rock, is that correct?12 That's correct.13 A. Okay.14 Q. So the surface joints that you see were different15 from what you're referring to last week where you said16 you couldn't see them?17 Right. That's a remote possibility.18 A. Why do you say, that's remote, how do you know if19 Q. you can't see it?20 Well, it's just based on the, it's based on the21 A. observation of rock that have been made in other areas22 near the site. That's just the way you have to do it if23 you can't see.24 I'm not saying you have x-ray vision, I am just25 Q. 28 asking you, how do you know it's a remote chance if you1 can't see inside the rock?2 Because generally joints are tight and sometimes3 A. they're wider joints.4 And you could see wider joints on the surface but5 Q. you don't know if they're below?6 Correct.7 A. Okay.8 Q. Now --9 I don't know if they're there either.10 A. I just said, you don't know if they're there?11 Q. Right.12 A. Okay.13 Q. Now, if those joints are there and water14 infiltrates, ultimately that will destabilize the rock,15 is that correct?16 Not necessarily. We don't know, but it's a17 A. precaution you take. If you see them you fill them.18 If the joints are there and water infiltrates19 Q. that's the factor that causes destabilization20 ultimately, isn't that correct?21 Correct.22 A. Thank you.23 Q. Now, you also say at Page 9, you report to a24 fault line. And you say, "Tectonic jointing is reported25

01/05/2026 02:58:16 PM Page 29 to 32 of 68 8 of 17 sheets 29 to range from a few feet to many feet far from the1 mapped faults but become closely spaced near the2 faults." Now, what is the reference and relevance of3 that to this project?4 That's the, that's the, we have a surveyors5 A. reference in there, it's the bedrock geology of the6 Caldwell Quadrangle Map and I think that statement comes7 from the map.8 And also refers to the Second Watchung ridge,9 Q. right?10 Right.11 A. So these faults are present in this ridge, is12 Q. that correct?13 No, the maps, there's one fault shown, it's about14 A. 2000 feet from the site, it was referenced by Langan in15 their report. It's in their report. The location is in16 the report. It's about 2000 feet away. Half a mile.17 Then you go onto say, "Tectonic joining is18 Q. reported to range from a few feet to many feet far from19 the mapped faults." So what is many feet, how far from20 the mapped faults do we see the tectonic jointing?21 I'm sorry. Are you talking about the spacing of22 A. the joints?23 I just read what you wrote. You said, you know,24 Q. there is a fault line about 2000 feet from the site.25 30 And then you say, "Tectonic jointing is reported to1 range from a few feet to many feet from the mapped2 faults but becomes closely spaced near the faults." So3 I am saying, how far is many feet?4 Well, many feet could be 5 or 10-feet.5 A. It could be a 1000 feet or 2000 feet?6 Q. It would be good if it was as much as a 10007 A. feet.8 Why?9 Q. The further spacing the better, because then10 A. there's more intact solid rock.11 So we don't really know at this point from this12 Q. reference whether it's better or worse, this condition?13 Right. But they identified joints, the spacing14 A. is there and there's joint spacing indicated on the test15 borings and there is a whole discussion of that in the16 back and forth between Langan and Princeton Hydro.17 Now, you also mentioned, you also mentioned, you18 Q. say at Page 15, this is referring to the site itself,19 "The rock formation, however, has a variable secondary20 permeability which is created by the complex network of21 intersecting fractures. Depending on the width of the22 fractures, the filling and surface roughness cracks23 surcharged by water levels high up on the slope can24 develop localized high hydrostatic pressures which could25 31 affect the local

idth of the22 fractures, the filling and surface roughness cracks23 surcharged by water levels high up on the slope can24 develop localized high hydrostatic pressures which could25 31 affect the local stability of the soil overburden."1 Now, what is this complex network of intersecting2 fractures and where is it on the site?3 The whole rock formation is cracked. So it's all4 A. over.5 So everywhere are on this site where they want to6 Q. put this building the rock formations cracked?7 Everywhere they're building in the Metropolitan8 A. area they have rock cracks.9 Well, most buildings aren't built on the ridge10 Q. line that rock collapses?11 Some.12 A. But some are.13 Q. Now, this building is on a network of14 intersecting fractures, is that correct?15 Right. And almost all buildings are.16 A. I heard you.17 Q. Now, what is the size of those fractures, is18 there any analyses done of that?19 We just defined them as very fine cracks roughly20 A. 2 inches apart and there are other cracks that were21 described from the Langan report.22 What other cracks and how wide?23 Q. I didn't get a direct width, but there are test24 A. borings that would have core samples in the Langan25 32 rebuttal report. There are rock core samples if you1 want me to take a look at that.2 Now, fair to say there are thousands of fractures3 Q. say where Building D would go?4 Right. And that's typical.5 A. I'm simply asking you, is it fair to say there6 Q. are many fractures where Building D will go?7 Right.8 A. Okay.9 Q. Now, when excavation is done, presumably the10 joints that exist inside the rock may be seen or will be11 seen?12 Correct.13 A. Now, who is responsible for filling those joints14 Q. to avoid this infiltration of water you spoke about last15 time?16 That would be part of the excavation work plan17 A. that we recommend having an engineer prepare as part of18 the requirement for the construction.19 And what would be in the excavation work plan20 Q. that would deal with this issue?21 It would be the -- it would be the treatment of22 A. cracks.23 In other words, the method of treating?24 Q. Right.25 A.

9 of 17 sheets Page 33 to 36 of 68 01/05/2026 02:58:16 PM 33 Now, who on-site would ascertain and guarantee1 Q. that these joints are in fact filled when they're2 identified?3 It would be -- there would be a requirement for a4 A. specialist to do that work in the excavation work plan.5 When you say, specialist, who would that person6 Q. be?7 It would be a person who has a lot of experience8 A. in filling cracks in rock.9 So they would be there, presumably, when they10 Q. fill the cracks and then what happens? Is there11 grouting those cracks, is that inspected by some neutral12 person or does the foundation work begin?13 The treatment of the rock is completed and then14 A. the foundation would begin.15 So no inspectors actually going to know to what16 Q. extent grouting was actually done because the foundation17 will go on top of it before any inspector sees it, isn't18 that true?19 No, you inspect the rock before you pour the20 A. concrete.21 I just asked whether or not there's an inspector22 Q. who's going to examine the grouting before the23 foundation is poured?24 Okay. I didn't understand.25 A. 34 Okay.1 Q. Yes. There is. There would be an inspector.2 A. Now, there could be thousands of potential cracks3 Q. to be grouted, right?4 Right.5 A. And this is a 800 hundred foot long by 200-foot6 Q. excavation going down 25 feet, right?7 Right.8 A. Now, if cracks are not filled and ultimately9 Q. filled with water that's what causes destabilization, is10 that correct?11 Well, where did the water come from?12 A. Why are you raising it in the first place?13 Q. So that the water is controlled, that's why we14 A. recommended that they look at the infiltration basins,15 so that they don't introduce water, otherwise there's --16 we're not sure there's even groundwater there.17 And you haven't had a confirmation on that issue?18 Q. Sorry?19 A. You haven't had confirmation yet on that issue?20 Q. On what issue?21 A. The examination of the infiltration basins.22 Q. No, I said that.23 A. Okay. I wanted to clarify. Thank you.24 Q. Now, let me get back to this page. We touched on25 35 this last week, the toe of the slope is the area that1 flattens out underneath the slope so the slope an maybe2 the toe comes here?3 Correct.4 A. Okay.5 Q. Now, would you agree in this particular site the6 slope on the building or next to the building, near just7 above the toe of the slope

o the slope an maybe2 the toe comes here?3 Correct.4 A. Okay.5 Q. Now, would you agree in this particular site the6 slope on the building or next to the building, near just7 above the toe of the slope not on the applicants8 property, but actually on the private homes that are9 behind the slope?10 There is a break in the slope, the slope flattens11 A. about halfway down the slope and then the toe of the12 slope would be down near the road where the houses are13 on the lower roadway.14 So the toe of the slope is actually on private15 Q. property, right?16 It goes right to the street probably.17 A. Okay.18 Q. So it's on their houses?19 Right.20 A. It's on their land. So the toe of the slope, to21 Q. clarify, is on the private homeowners land, right?22 I am not sure that's the final toe. There's23 A. another couple 100 feet to the main road, so.24 Well, if --25 Q. 36 The slope may continue beyond what's shown on the1 A. drawings. I didn't investigate that.2 Okay.3 Q. Well, let me ask you, in the catchment area it4 refers to the area of toe of the slope that is designed5 to catch rocks and overburden and other things that may6 come down the slope, isn't that correct?7 I don't know what that is.8 A. You don't where the catchment area is?9 Q. No.10 A. Well, it's actually in the townships steep slopes11 Q. ordinance that refers to catchment areas being --12 If you're talking about the slope where there's13 A. rock fall, which is not the case here, then you need an14 area to contain the rock fall, if that's what you mean,15 then that's what it is.16 Well, if there is no rock fall seen presently17 Q. you're saying -- you're saying you haven't observed rock18 fall presently?19 There's only small outcrops roughly 10-feet high.20 A. Well, if the ridge is destabilized by blasting21 Q. then isn't there a much greater likely of rock fall?22 Well, the blasting charges should be limited so23 A. it wouldn't be destabilized.24 If mistakes are made or good planning is not25 Q.

01/05/2026 02:58:16 PM Page 37 to 40 of 68 10 of 17 sheets 37 used, and we have seen in many cases buildings collapse1 and other structures collapse because of engineering2 problems, then rocks would slide and you need a3 catchment area, isn't that fair to say?4 No, not in this case.5 A. Why not in this case, what makes you so sure?6 Q. Because this is essentially a soil slope with7 A. rock in it. It's not a rock slope. If you -- there's8 another site down on the First Watchung Mountains on9 Northfield Road where everything you're talking about10 exists, but doesn't exist here.11 Well, if you stabilize the rock where we are12 Q. going to blast that rock destabilizing could cause a13 slope?14 You're going to do it so you don't destabilize15 A. it.16 Engineering is designed to cover when people make17 Q. mistakes so people don't die. Would you agree with that18 proposition?19 I have been doing this for 20 years and --20 A. CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: I think he answered the21 question as an expert. You keep asking him to answer22 questions the way you want, he answered the question23 three times.24 Let me ask this question.25 Q. 38 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: He answered.1 MR. AFRAN: This is a different question.2 The reason we have engineers is so we can build3 Q. property that minimize the risk of human life and4 property, isn't that fair to say?5 And that's why I recommended that there be an6 A. excavation work plan certified by a professional7 engineer registered in the State of New Jersey.8 Even though the Planning Board would not see that9 Q. and not be able to evaluate it?10 We recommend that be sent as a requirement to the11 A. developer.12 Thank you. But does that mean as a condition of13 Q. approval after this is approved, possibly, or do you14 mean before the board votes?15 I don't do municipal engineering myself, I don't16 A. know what this process, what, you know, what the process17 is. I am just telling you technically what is done.18 That there is an excavation work plan and that19 Q. should answer many of these questions?20 Yes.21 A. Okay.22 Q. Would you agree that these slopes we are dealing23 with here are steep slopes as defined by the town steep24 slope ordinance?25 39 Sorry.1 A. Let me repeat that. Would you agree that the2 Q. slopes we are dealing with here are steep slopes as3 defined by the townships steep slope ordinance, unless4 you don't know?5 I don't