January 14, 2026, Planning Board Special Meeting - WEHI Transcript

19 of 53 sheets Page 73 to 76 of 122 02/03/2026 04:49:05 PM 73 they come out and they can't really find the problem and1 then the cycle continues.2 No ones explained adequately how the new3 sewer line will work, but I understand there will be a4 new substation somewhere and I believe this is not an5 issue saved for construction plans, this is a critical6 issue and the Planning Board should not be approving7 this without a full understanding how the sewer plans8 are laid out with utilities and the utility authority9 deeming it safe without creating obnoxious smells for10 all the residents, both the ones who are proposed to11 live in the new project and the ones currently who live12 on Howell Drive and surrounding areas.13 Now, with regard to the traffic. The cars14 are supposed to flow out onto Oval Road and then to15 Eagle Rock. Howell Drive is only supposed to be used16 for emergencies. Howell Drive cannot sustain additional17 cars. It's very narrow with several bends.18 Now, there were agreements decades ago to19 ensure that Howell Drive was not opened up and that must20 be upheld. I am also extremely worried about Building D21 and confused how the Planning Board could approve22 Building D -- approve the project with Building D in it.23 It is built along steep slopes and some points, as we24 heard testimony, are seven feet from the pinch point.25 74 This is a hazard. It would be a hazard for those who1 live there and a hazard for everyone who lives below the2 slope, Howell Drive, Rosemont, Mayfair and Nasser Road.3 I believe the Planning Board is putting lives and4 property at risk if you approve this project with5 Building D where it is currently set. The Planning6 boars has the discretion to mandate some changes to this7 project. I have heard them do that several times8 throughout this process. Additional lighting,9 additional parking, but I think you need to start10 focusing on the core safety issue. While I think this11 project should not be built for many of the reasons my12 neighbors will explain, I expect, including the thousand13 plus cars that will be flowing onto Eagle Rock, at a14 bare minimum the Planning Board cannot in good conscious15 allow this project with Building D.16 The Planning Board is well aware of the Ron17 Jolyn tragedy and you're well aware that after that18 occurred the town council amended the steep slope19 ordinance. This

this project with Building D.16 The Planning Board is well aware of the Ron17 Jolyn tragedy and you're well aware that after that18 occurred the town council amended the steep slope19 ordinance. This project is in violation of that20 ordinance. I have heard the Planning Board does not21 have to consider that because of the settlement. I22 think the Planning Board needs to assert some23 responsibility when it comes to this issue. I think24 there's also misnomers the court approved the25 75 settlement, court approved the fair share housing plan.1 I urge the Planning Board not to make any rash2 decisions. There's been over 25 plus hearings, a3 tremendous amount of testimony and I know that the4 Planning Board does take it's job very seriously and5 hope that when public comment is concluded they will6 really take the time to dive into all these issues and7 understand whether or not this is appropriate for this8 area. Thank you.9 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you very much.10 Any other members of the public who have11 comments about this application? Please come up.12 THE PUBLIC: Good evening. My name is13 Barbara White. I talked to all you at one point or14 another and want to continue --15 MS. McGOVERN: Do you swear or affirm to16 tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth.17 THE PUBLIC: I do.18 MS. McGOVERN: We do need the address on the19 record.20 THE PUBLIC: 51 Howell Drive.21 MS. McGOVERN: Thank you.22 THE PUBLIC: I have some very, very deep23 concerns that I have not heard fully addressed in24 testimony, and they have to do very much with the25 76 general safety of the project. There's -- for example,1 one of the things that was provided to me by the Mayor,2 which I did raise some concerns, was a copy of an April3 4, 2024 letter from the previous fire department and4 answered several of the questions that have been raised.5 I looked at that letter, the letter leaves questions,6 important ones, unanswered. As an example, the letter7 indicates that the fire chief is not able to lend an8 opinion on traffic in and out of that area because he9 didn't have a traffic report that he could review. What10 is not mentioned in that, and certainly becomes a bigger11 concern, because fires have continued, the environment12 is more threatening, we have not yet heard what the plan13 is for water at that height. One of the wonderful14 things about living at 51 Howell

concern, because fires have continued, the environment12 is more threatening, we have not yet heard what the plan13 is for water at that height. One of the wonderful14 things about living at 51 Howell Drive is the views and15 the deer and the trees. One of the not so wonderful16 thing about living there is because of the very steep17 slopes. Those of us, myself and many of my neighbors,18 in order to run a sprinkler system or be able to flush a19 toilet while you're taking a shower, you have to have a20 very expensive individual pump in your home. We do not21 know which of the water authorities will supply the22 water, all though West Orange residents water is from23 Verona. We, again, have no idea how this is going to24 work and since we don't know how the water is going to25

02/03/2026 04:49:05 PM Page 77 to 80 of 122 20 of 53 sheets 77 go into these almost 500 units, it also begs the1 question of what water availability there is in the2 event of a fire.3 The letter from the previous chief was4 rendered previous to the fire that took place in April5 of last year in the Reservation. That fire ended up6 burning 18 acres, the topography is not significantly7 different from where we are, except that there are no8 homes there. We aren't trying to fight a fire in the9 middle of a residential area.10 The other difference is that particular area11 is groomed. If you look at the woods, you've seen12 plenty of pictures, it is unmanaged, it is ungroomed.13 In the event if you had something catastrophic enough I14 believe if you tried to evacuate the property, I do not15 know how 600 families, 1200 cars leave that property16 safely. You can't walk out of it.17 One of my neighbors here husband happens to18 be an ER doctor, he talked about the woods as being a19 widow maker. Trees come partially down, they're not20 removed, so even just trying to walk through the woods21 is dangerous but in the event something happened, it's22 next to impossible. That a fire that took place in the23 Reservation, took place, initially the call was at24 night. So just imagine you are asleep, the 911 call25 78 goes in at 10:39 PM, you live in one of those almost 6001 units and, yes, there will be an alarm and, yes, you2 will be told to go to the roof or wherever else, but3 there is nothing that is going to deal with the human4 emotion of I am living in the middle of the woods. I5 have deer fencing around me, I am afraid for my family6 and I want to get out. We do not know how those people7 would leave in any reasonably sized emergency. When the8 fire chief spoke to the ingress and egress in the letter9 that I referred to earlier, most of it was around the10 building and the fire trucks to turnaround, that was11 something that was a big issue with 136 houses. It did12 not in any way speak to what happens when you need too13 get into that property and people are getting out, what14 happens when cars are abandoned. Think about that15 California fire. All those people had to leave their16 cars. How do you get fire trucks in and out. How do17 other services get in and out. They did not have that18 challenge in the Reservation. And by the way, the lead19 fire

people had to leave their16 cars. How do you get fire trucks in and out. How do17 other services get in and out. They did not have that18 challenge in the Reservation. And by the way, the lead19 fire department in the Reservation was in fact the West20 Orange Fire Department. I think we have a major safety21 issue that had not been fully addressed and discussed22 during the course of this project. I would urge you to23 seek one more persons testimony, have the fire chief24 come take a look at how they were able to manage or not25 79 manage that fire that took place. Learn about the fact1 that the only way to get to the fire is to bring in2 special equipment. Talk about the challenges you have.3 We don't have adequate water supplies, but you have 6004 families in the middle of a forest.5 Thank you for your time and attention.6 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you very much.7 Do any other members of the public have any8 comments? Please come up and be identified.9 State your name and address.10 THE PUBLIC: My name is Lori Hassell. I11 live in the West Essex Highlands. Address is 6l Lapis12 Circle.13 MS. McGOVERN: Do you swear or affirm to14 tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth.15 THE PUBLIC: Yes.16 I've been a resident of West Orange17 Highlands since 2016, about nine and half years now. I18 am here to oppose the project proposed by Wilf and his19 company, Garden Homes and named affiliates. I first20 would like to mention, I'm not opposed to state mandated21 programs such as Mount Laurel. In fact I was previous22 Division Manager CTX Northeast under the umbrella of the23 Centex Homes, where at the time of my tenure was the24 third largest builder in the country. I advocated and25 80 facilitated Mount Laurel housing in many communities I1 served. I supported the program over the years as I am2 a single mom and raise two boys that are now young3 adults, I fortunately did not need this type of program4 but always advocated and sympathized with those who did5 and still do, only where it makes sense. I understand6 for other counties and my circle of influence that the7 state is putting pressure on all towns to meet their8 long overdue quotas with a deadline through 2025. I9 also understand the threat of a lawsuit under the10 builders remedy inclusion in the doctrine. I also11 understand the Mount Laurel housing strict requirements12 for selected properties

rough 2025. I9 also understand the threat of a lawsuit under the10 builders remedy inclusion in the doctrine. I also11 understand the Mount Laurel housing strict requirements12 for selected properties and need to ensure they have all13 necessary permits and approvals before selecting a14 property and includes the -- and includes the property15 will abide by local zoning regulations, soil quality and16 access to utility and any environmental restrictions.17 Hence, all these lovely reports and studies were18 completed. I bring this up because I want to emphasize19 the developers own traffic engineer testified under oath20 that as the plan exists now that what I am about to21 express here alarmingly won't change. What is happening22 with this project does not make sense. There are23 variables that will affect surrounding communities, such24 as West Essex Highlands. Due to the lack of time I am25

21 of 53 sheets Page 81 to 84 of 122 02/03/2026 04:49:05 PM 81 going to mention two that directly relate to West Essex1 Highlands.2 My first concern is flooding. Recently our3 community has paid tens of thousands of dollars to4 remediate a flooding issue in several buildings that5 have been ongoing for years with many attempts to6 correct incurring costs along the way. From what I have7 been advised, this issue has been ongoing since West8 Essex Highlands initial development, which I am sure you9 are aware this community was built by the same10 developer. My concern is that if this new development11 changes the land it will create flooding once again12 producing an even more harmful situation than it has13 been all these years. I am not sure those same14 buildings will tolerate increased flooding levels and15 believe that more buildings will fall into the same16 deteriorated condition. I am not an expert but I have17 personally experienced when a neighbor changes the land18 even remotely minor in nature it can change the water19 flow and in turn affect neighboring properties20 negatively. I question if the fail in the slope or a21 change in the water flow affects the neighboring22 communities who will be responsible.23 My second concern is infrastructure. There24 are 300 units with an estimated over 1,000 residents in25 82 West Essex Highlands, The Grand has roughly 70 homes1 with an estimated population of over 300 residents2 totaling 1,300 in total. Within the last year the only3 road into the West Essex Highlands was blocked due to a4 fire on the site of Oval Road. This incident lasted5 about two to three hours and thankfully no one needed6 immediate medical assistance nor any other life7 threatening emergency and our ability to exit or enter8 the community resumed. The year prior to The Grand9 incident there was fire with similar issues.10 Surprisingly this is not a rare occurrence. With the11 amount of additional housing the chance of yet another12 fire and blocking the roads certainly increases. This13 road is already a very precarious set up and I fear what14 will happen in the future will be catastrophic,15 especially given 500 units carrying at least a 1,000 to16 2,000 more residents resulting in a total of three to17 four thousand trapped residents.18 In addition, a potential equal amount of19 cars in the road creating an influx of traffic into

t a 1,000 to16 2,000 more residents resulting in a total of three to17 four thousand trapped residents.18 In addition, a potential equal amount of19 cars in the road creating an influx of traffic into and20 out of the community is not only creating noise21 pollution but with the current traffic patterns a series22 of accidents is bound to happen all by itself. Thank23 you.24 The timer. Can I finish?25 83 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Go right ahead.1 THE PUBLIC: The current road design at the2 end of Oval Road which the 90 degree angle already is3 conducive to constant crashes and ultimately destroys4 our community brick wall causing West Essex Highlands5 thousands to repair. The West Essex Highlands is an6 aging community with a high concentration of retirees.7 We already have a single point of failure and I fear it8 is a death trap waiting to happen with the increased9 traffic and population. I implore you to allow Wilf to10 find another more reasonably, less negatively affecting11 property. I am sure he's happy to promise the same12 Mount Laurel contribution to fulfill the fair share13 housing requirements mandated by the state and I would14 be happy to help.15 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you very much.16 Any other member of the public have any17 comments? Please come up, be identified and state your18 name and address.19 THE PUBLIC: Justin Goldman, 14 Moran Road,20 West Orange.21 MS. McGOVERN: Do you swear or affirm to22 tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the23 truth.24 THE PUBLIC: I do.25 84 So good evening Planning Board members.1 Thank you for your time tonight and Happy New Year.2 I want to start by saying the last council3 meeting on January 6 I requested an update on a4 stormwater ordinance that I had drafted for the town5 relating to missing stormwater data. At that meeting6 the update I received was that we still do not have7 accurate stormwater data and that the time line would be8 at least several months and I believe in good faith9 citing the number was at least six months before we have10 the data in order to "be in compliance with the new set11 of laws." And before someone asks if the missing data12 that we don't have is specifically pertinent to West13 Highlands, I'd say it's irrelevant where the missing14 data comes from because stormwater, as we know, has15 recipratory effects, that's why we have neighboring16 towns concerned with this issue as

13 Highlands, I'd say it's irrelevant where the missing14 data comes from because stormwater, as we know, has15 recipratory effects, that's why we have neighboring16 towns concerned with this issue as well.17 I believe this is a relevant update for this18 panel tonight because as it pertains, our town, in our19 council meetings, is acknowledging that it does not have20 appropriate or full data in which I would feel confident21 for our ability to ensure that we can safely handle22 exacerbated stormwater capacity and yet we are here23 knowingly acknowledging that we don't have that data and24 moving forward with the proposal in which that data is25

02/03/2026 04:49:05 PM Page 85 to 88 of 122 22 of 53 sheets 85 needed to ensure resident safety. So I believe that1 we're advocating our duty as our town in full admittance2 when you say things like, to be in compliance,3 acknowledging that we're currently not in compliance4 with the environmental stormwater regulations and5 admitting that we have missing data that could be6 relevant and pertinent to this application. That's why7 I asked that at the last council meeting, because I8 asked at th previous council meeting where that update9 was and our town employees spoke on the record at that10 meeting saying that we do not have that data and it11 would take six months at a minimum until we are able to12 have that data. So at a bear minimum I'm asking that13 this board not move forward at least for another six14 months, until we have that proposed potential data,15 because our town is now on the record and I want to put16 this out there, of admitting that we do not have the17 data as it relates to stormwater mapping and on the18 record as to us saying that we are not in compliance,19 that's not my words, that is a town representative who20 asked to speak on behalf of the council at the last21 council meeting. That should raise grave concerns as to22 how we could have faith that our governing body are not23 only in competing interests because we're standing there24 and one body saying that we don't have the data and then25 86 the next body we're supposed to be relying on the data1 in our town saying it doesn't matter if we have the data2 or not. So I am just asking that we come to some type3 of agreement as to multiple arms of our town supposedly4 working on behalf of the interest of West Orange to at5 least say we need something concrete, comprehensive and6 consistent before we can make decisions that put our7 residents safety at harm. We can't willingly and8 honestly say in one meeting that we are missing data as9 it relates to something as severe as stormwater runoff10 and our pipe capacity and other issues and then in the11 next meeting say we brought in somebody else and they12 kind of said it might be okay. We don't really know.13 We'll figure it out. All I'm asking and I, because I've14 been here multiple times in good faith, let's operate in15 the same good faith that I'm asking this question, and16 get the same good faith argument back. If we don't