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

29 of 53 sheets Page 113 to 116 of 122 02/03/2026 04:49:05 PM 113 expected to have tall apartment buildings hovering over1 our backyards, or allow a bird's-eye view into their2 homes from a tenant of a high-rise apartment building.3 None of us will ever enjoy the peaceful sanctuary we4 have come to love. And I believe the value of all of5 our homes will take a huge hit if this is allowed to6 happen.7 The deer and other wildlife that roam8 through our backyards will no longer have a home in the9 woods. More will be killed coming out of the area or10 causing damage to our properties.11 I don't believe that the land can tolerate12 this heavy construction. We have experienced downfalls13 of rain that cause many areas of our streets to buckle14 that summer with -- last summer, with water running down15 Howell Drive like it was a river. Trees have been16 uprooted from these events, and I have been a substitute17 teacher at Redwood and Kelly for the past 13 years, we18 have had to deal with serious cutbacks this school year.19 They had to change the middle school to all but six20 through eight instead of the one central six in Edison21 to save money on busing. I know firsthand the school22 cannot handle an influx of hundreds of more children in23 our schools and the roads can definitely not handle the24 influx of possibly a 1,000 plus more cars on Eagle Rock25 114 Avenue. The Eagle Rock/Pleasant Valley Way Avenue areas1 already congested during both rush hours and during2 drop-off and pick up and of course the buses that will3 be needed for the additional children.4 I urge you to either amend this, we can not5 have a five story building on the edge of a cliff.6 Thank you.7 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you very much.8 THE PUBLIC: Jessica Pearson.9 MS. McGOVERN: Do you swear or affirm to10 tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth.11 THE PUBLIC: I do.12 MS. McGOVERN: Thank you.13 THE PUBLIC: The development before you this14 evening and for the past year and half was arrived at by15 a developers agreement drafted by a former council who16 waived all municipal environmental and zoning17 regulations, which should raise a huge red flag.18 Regardless of the thread barren hollow nature of this19 developer's agreement, it's Municipal Land Use Law that20 should be this boards guiding principal, as it commands21 all sworn board members the responsibility to

thread barren hollow nature of this19 developer's agreement, it's Municipal Land Use Law that20 should be this boards guiding principal, as it commands21 all sworn board members the responsibility to advance22 the common good of the community and protect the health,23 safety and welfare of residents and really not just24 residents of West Orange, all New Jersey residents, as25 115 you swear an oath to Municipal Land Use Law in New1 Jersey and that includes your neighbors, all of which2 have responded to this proposal whether by resolution or3 by legal action adversely. Even the Essex County Board4 of County Commissioners has passed a unanimous5 resolution in opposition to this proposal. In taking6 your oath you swore to uphold the MLUL and perform your7 duties faithfully and partially and justly based upon8 laws and facts presented. You swore to secure safety9 from fire, flood, panic and other natural and manmade10 disasters, emphasis added. Well, we have heard11 testimony from residents, from professionals, we have12 read reports, we have seen videos that check all of13 those boxes that I just cited and that's before the14 construction has begun.15 From Princeton Hydro, who factually16 demonstrated that the applicant is not compliant even17 with the older and more protective stormwater regs.18 When videos have shown us that these flood conditions19 are already present, and this is before the destruction20 of a forest. Preservation of the environment is also21 included in the MLUL and by removing thousands of22 proposed trees and adding deer fencing in there instead.23 We heard testimony from Dr. Emile DeVito, an expert,24 that the applicants planner will not preserve the25 116 remaining forested lands but destroy them in their1 entirety. Facts. We saw footage of residents trapped2 in a cul-de-sac during the frightening fire event when3 this proposal seeks to expand that cul-de-sac to include4 an additional 496 units. I don't know about you but Mr.5 Steinberg's testimony gives no comfort in regard to the6 slope stability issue. Kleinberg. Sorry. I saw the7 look on your face. Kleinberg. That this construction8 could cause destabilization and potential catastrophic9 rock slides is not okay. And it is in direct opposition10 to the oath that you guys have taken.11 Lastly, and this is a really big problem.12 We have the absence of facts, the absence and data

rophic9 rock slides is not okay. And it is in direct opposition10 to the oath that you guys have taken.11 Lastly, and this is a really big problem.12 We have the absence of facts, the absence and data from13 the applicant. No data, no testimony, no plans14 presented on adequate water supply and sewage. The only15 mention of the sewage facility by the engineer was to16 tell us they needed to schedule a meeting with the Joint17 Meeting, but there's been no follow-up on that. There18 has been nothing presented to you on paper and discussed19 in any public manner on this topic. I want to remind20 the board that according to the MLUL it is your21 responsibility to fully review all aspects of plans to22 determine compliance safety and the very feasibility of23 a proposal based upon all of the evidence and absence of24 such testimony should weigh heavily.25