January 28, 2026, Planning Board Special Meeting - WEHI Transcript

02/26/2026 05:17:42 PM Page 85 to 88 of 155 22 of 66 sheets 85 approval because they didn't want access granted to the1 120 acres remaining. In order to proceed this owner2 agreed to give their word to deed restrict. They added3 a restrictive covenant to the properties on Howell4 Drive. The current settlement agreement the Township of5 West Orange has with this developer also mentions a deed6 restriction. They are agreeing that the remaining 907 acres will not be developed. The deed restriction8 section of the settlement agreement that everyone refers9 to all the time reads, I quote, "Shall restrict the10 subject property from all further development" with some11 exceptions for accessory dwellings and utilities.12 In the Verona Planning Board resolution it13 mentioned, specifically number 9 of the 1980's14 agreement, and I quote, "That a restrictive covenant be15 placed in the deed of each individual lot in the entire16 development against any use other than one family17 homes." If the owner, this developer, is not honoring18 the deed restrictions they agreed to in the '80's19 resolutions then how is the current agreement, the20 covenant, going to be honored? Their words and21 agreements cannot be trusted. They have proven to this22 board and to the public that they don't honor their23 words by using two properties they promised. Promised24 to deed restrict as single family homes only, they want25 86 to use as access roadways. So they don't live up to,1 they don't honor their word but as we can see they have2 the money to try and get around living up to and3 honoring their word. In the end when the applicant4 doesn't honor their word, they make you, the board5 members, look like the bad peeps.6 Protect your West Orange neighbors and7 fellow Essex County neighbors and residents and vote8 down this application because it's all about the money.9 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Go right ahead.10 State your name for the record, please.11 THE PUBLIC: Sarah Ofarrell,12 O-F-A-R-R-E-L-L, 27 Westview Road, Verona. And I also13 am going to read something for another resident, Jean14 Stoloff at -- I heard Mr. Bagoff, you said that I had15 one time to speak and I could read for someone else.16 MS. McGOVERN: No, no. That was confusing.17 When we -- when the person who testified last time18 testified it sounded as if it was a joint statement.19 Not he was reading on behalf of somebody

else.16 MS. McGOVERN: No, no. That was confusing.17 When we -- when the person who testified last time18 testified it sounded as if it was a joint statement.19 Not he was reading on behalf of somebody else. So you20 want to incorporate their opinions into yours --21 THE PUBLIC: I can just read it then.22 MS. McGOVERN: -- and just make it your23 own --24 THE PUBLIC: Okay. Thank you.25 87 MS. McGOVERN: You can do that.1 Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the2 whole truth and nothing but the truth.3 THE PUBLIC: Yes.4 MS. McGOVERN: Thank you.5 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you. Go ahead.6 THE PUBLIC: Good evening. I respectfully7 but firmly ask the Planning Board to deny approval of8 the proposed West Essex Highlands development. If this9 project moves forward it will lock-in decades of serious10 safety and public health risks for West Orange and for11 the neighboring communities of Verona, Essex Fells,12 Roseland and South Orange. This is not a routine13 development site, it is a steep bedrock slope. A14 drinking water source and an area surrounded by15 established neighborhoods with limited access and16 multiple environmental constraints. Given these unique17 conditions the project presents several critical hazards18 that make it unsuitable for approval.19 First, water quality. This site sits at the20 headwaters of the Canoe Brook which supplies drinking21 water to several towns. Disturbing the slope will22 increase erosion, sediment runoff and pollutant flow,23 all of which will degrade water quality and raise24 treatment for thousands of people downstream.25 88 Removing trees further eliminates the1 natural filtration that currently protects this water2 supply.3 On top of this, the plan uses porous4 pavement directly in a sensitive headwater zone.5 According to the NJDEP and NJ Department of6 Transportation, porous pavement can clog and fail, and7 when it does it sends oils, metals and deicing chemicals8 straight into groundwater. Experts have repeatedly9 warned that porous pavement should not be used near10 wetlands, headwaters, or drinking water sources. Yet11 the plan relies on it here.12 Second, fire safety. There are two major13 fire safety issues. The first is inadequate exit access14 through Oval Road. The April 2025 fire demonstrated15 exactly how dangerous this was when road were shutdown16 and residents had no reliable way out. All though

. The first is inadequate exit access14 through Oval Road. The April 2025 fire demonstrated15 exactly how dangerous this was when road were shutdown16 and residents had no reliable way out. All though the17 developer proposes an emergency access road to Howell18 Drive, Howell is narrow, has steep blind and curves and19 becomes treacherous in snow or freezing rain. An20 evacuation utilizing this route with cars and21 pedestrians without access to a vehicles trying to22 escape simultaneously would place residents in sever23 danger.24 The second issue, is the lack of emergency25

23 of 66 sheets Page 89 to 92 of 155 02/26/2026 05:17:42 PM 89 access behind Building D. Only seven feet separate the1 building from the steep slope, far to little space for2 personnel, equipment or hose lines. Firefighters would3 have no safe approach for a fire on the slope or behind4 the building as flames sore in the air creating a life5 threatening situation for residents and first6 responders.7 Third, steep slopes instability. The8 project requires deep blasting, up 25 feet and massive9 retaining walls. Princeton Hydro's expert literally10 warned that the current plan puts the slope and the11 homes below it at real risk. He even said on the12 record, that he would not sleep in Building D as13 proposed and recommended moving it back 100 feet.14 Warnings of this magnitude can not be ignored.15 Fourth, flooding. The developer is not16 following current New Jersey stormwater regulations.17 Regulations created specifically to reduce flooding and18 property damage. Residents have already documented19 flooding under existing conditions. Removing trees and20 disturbing the hillside will significantly worsen21 runoff. Because the plans have changed substantially22 after the settlement, West Orange is fully allowed to23 require compliance for todays stricter standards.24 Fifth, lack of pedestrian and transit25 90 access. This site is not served by practical public1 transportation. The development forces reliance on2 private vehicles, increases traffic and leaves3 affordable housing residents with limited access to4 jobs, food, and essential services. Residents without5 cars will be being forced to walk on busy roads putting6 them and their children at risk.7 For all these reasons, water protection,8 fire safety, slope stability, stormwater management and9 basic access, the risks are to great. A denial based on10 these seven things is not only justified but is the11 responsible and necessary decision to protect West12 Orange, Verona and our neighboring communities.13 And I am now also saying as a member of the14 Verona Environmental Commission, that this project will15 have permanent and destructive impacts on our community.16 More so this owners legal counsel is running defense for17 an indefensible development. The developer/owner has18 never once engaged with the community that will forever19 be impacted by this proposal. Taking into consideration20 the length

ning defense for17 an indefensible development. The developer/owner has18 never once engaged with the community that will forever19 be impacted by this proposal. Taking into consideration20 the length of the application, the problems that have21 been testified about and the overabundance of public22 input, it raises questions about transparency and good23 faith. One would think the developer/owner would want24 to engage with the community and amend the plans by25 91 lessening the environmental impact, making the project1 more safe and then potentially assuaging the residents2 fears. Nevertheless, he didn't even try and that is3 troubling.4 Thank you for your time and please deny this5 application.6 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you.7 Good evening. State your name for the8 record, sir.9 THE PUBLIC: Greg Montgomery. I live at 1310 Connolly Drive East, West Orange, New Jersey.11 MS. McGOVERN: Do you swear or affirm to12 tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the13 truth.14 THE PUBLIC: I will.15 MS. McGOVERN: Thank you.16 THE PUBLIC: I haven't spoken at any of17 these meetings, I haven't been able to attend in person18 and so I wasn't able to comment, but today I am.19 I want to thank you guys for being here and20 for your time on this, apparently it's been quite a bit21 of time.22 I am against this development, it looks like23 it's been tried several times over the years, every -- I24 don't know how many years, they try again and the site25 92 is not suitable for development and yet you're having 281 meetings trying to make it work. You know, make the2 plan fit something that can't work. Like it can't work.3 It hasn't worked before, it's not working now.4 The environmental impact, all the things that5 these people have talked about make it impossible to6 actually develop this area and I think people have an7 idea that development equals progress and development8 does not equal progress. Smart development, sustainable9 development could equal progress. We need low income10 housing, but what are you getting. Are you getting 45011 low income housing units? No. You're getting a, you12 know, 20 percent low income and they won't even be as13 good as the higher income housing, right. It's a14 different floor plan, the whole thing is different.15 When my wife and I moved here six years ago we16 moved here because of the trees. If you look at a map17 of New Jersey

me housing, right. It's a14 different floor plan, the whole thing is different.15 When my wife and I moved here six years ago we16 moved here because of the trees. If you look at a map17 of New Jersey coming out of New York City, this is where18 the trees start. This is where the trees start and the19 highway stop, you know, they get smaller, it's not just20 roads, it's not just buildings. When you go up to21 overlook the city, we overlook the city, we don't want22 to live there. None of us want to live there. We want23 to live in West Orange where the trees are, where the24 animals are.25

02/26/2026 05:17:42 PM Page 93 to 96 of 155 24 of 66 sheets 93 Now, this development where it's placed is,1 the animals don't stay in one spot. Okay. They have to2 move. Their families grow, they have to move. They --3 they have to forage, they don't stay in one spot. Where4 this is located, it's part of the animal pathway that5 connects various wooded areas in this location all the6 way to the river on the north and all the way to the7 river on the south through our reservations and private8 land. It's not a great place to put a development9 because you're interrupting that.10 A forest, as you know, is not a single tree.11 Lie a single tree in your yard, it's great. You plant12 one, you don't live as long as it does, but it does not13 provide habitat for more than one species maybe. An14 intact forest on the other hand, a minimum time to grow15 is 100 years, but to get the mycelium networks, to get16 the thriving plant communities, you're looking at a17 thousands of years. That's 300 years times three. Your18 tree grows and dies three times.19 This forest, from what I'm hearing, has been20 here that long. So there are trees in there that are21 here before any European settler even came to this, you22 know, land. That was the forest. Most of the east23 coast was forest. It's all gone. West Orange has24 something that nobody else around here has, we have an25 94 intact, old growth forest that's not been developed.1 It's never been developed and if you guys choose to2 develop it this time, even though its been chosen not to3 be developed several times, that's going to be gone.4 None of us can replace a thousand year old forest. None5 of us can replace 100 year old tree. No one can bring6 me a 100 year old tree no matter how much money I have,7 right. You can't bring me a 300 year old forest. You8 can't build a 300 year old forest. How long does an9 apartment building last? Like how long before this town10 is going to have to pay to tear that apartment building11 down again. We might live to see that, but we will not12 live to see a 300 year old forest regrow. None of us13 will live to see that.14 So the reason why we moved here is because15 this is a small diverse town that cares about its16 environment. We have the reservations, you know, we're17 looking out for this kind of thing. It hasn't worked in18 the past, it's not going to work in the future.

l diverse town that cares about its16 environment. We have the reservations, you know, we're17 looking out for this kind of thing. It hasn't worked in18 the past, it's not going to work in the future. It19 doesn't matter how much you tweak the plan, it's not a20 good plan. It's throwing money down a rat hole, you21 know. Somebody's going to make some money off it, it's22 not going to be us. It's going to be short-term, it's23 going to be extracted, you know. The monies not going24 to stay in West Orange. I would urge you to think about25 95 these things. It's something we have that no one else1 has and once it's gone it's gone and all we have is an2 apartment building that's going to fall apart in 503 years.4 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Please state your name for5 the record.6 THE PUBLIC: Nancy Meyerowitz,7 M-E-Y-E-R-O-W-I-T-Z, 19 Howell Drive, West Orange.8 MS. McGOVERN: Do you swear or affirm to9 tell the truth the whole and nothing but the truth.10 THE PUBLIC: I do.11 MS. McGOVERN: Thank you.12 THE PUBLIC: We are the original owners of13 37 years of our home on Howell Drive which was built by14 Garden Homes. The top of our property touches the15 cul-de-sac where the emergency access road will come in16 and we're at the bottom of steep slope by Building D.17 I'm not going to repeat what the experts have said, I am18 not an expert, but I want to address the real impact on19 us, and it's not just our story, it's the story of20 everyone on Howell Drive and the Highlands and every21 town surrounding the community. And we're asking that22 you deny this application. Not set conditions but deny23 the project for the many unknown questions that still24 remain and for the none impact on public safety.25 96 Regarding runoff and flooding. We've had1 continued flooding in or backyard since Garden Homes2 built our home 37 years ago. When it rains our backyard3 floods, the storm drains buckle I know Garden Homes had4 a water management, stormwater management plan then, it5 didn't work then, it doesn't work now and they were6 nowhere to be found when we had these issues. So you7 understand why we don't trust that the plan for this8 site will be upheld.9 And addressing these issues after they occur10 is to late, it's to late to save our homes or our lives11 in the event of a life threatening situation. You've12 heard for Princeton Hydro that the stormwater management13 plan is not

ter they occur10 is to late, it's to late to save our homes or our lives11 in the event of a life threatening situation. You've12 heard for Princeton Hydro that the stormwater management13 plan is not compliant with current state and local14 requirements. We -- you must require the developer15 conform with current stormwater guidelines, even if that16 means a delay or redesign of the project. To wave17 compliance on current regulations for a project hasn't18 even started is unconscionable.19 Regarding the steep slope. The development20 puts all our homes on Howell Drive and others at risk21 for landslides during heavy rains or during blasting.22 Building D is only 106 feet from our home and seven feet23 from the ridge line. We know we'll feel the impact of24 blasting. Not one expert you've heard has reassured us25

25 of 66 sheets Page 97 to 100 of 155 02/26/2026 05:17:42 PM 97 that there won't be damage during blasting. They talk1 about probabilities or safety factors, the only2 acceptable safety factor is a zero risk and that isn't3 the case in this project, particularly near Building D.4 Regarding the deer and wildlife. We have5 deer in our backyard and streets everyday on Howell6 Drive now. With this development and all these deer7 fences there's going to be -- they're going to push the8 deer onto -- into our backyards, but more importantly9 into the streets causing more and more accidents in our10 area.11 Regarding the traffic. The experts had12 predicted doubling to 5,000 trips per day. One traffic13 light will not fix this problem. In addition, most14 people haven't spoken about the impact of the15 intersection of Pleasant Valley Way and Eagle Rock.16 Right now during rush hour it's backed up in all17 directions. Can you imagine what 3,000 more cars will18 do to the Eagle Rock/Pleasant Valley Way intersection.19 You rejected this proposal because of the20 one road in, one road out many years ago. I don't think21 anything has changed, other than instead of 130 single22 family homes, we'll now have 500 families trapped in the23 event of a fire or a forest fire or regular fire.24 Finally, we've been to the 20 plus meetings25 98 or listened to the rest on zoom and there's so many1 unanswered questions that to us, in and of themselves2 should stop this project from moving forward. Things3 like can the sewage system handle the project? What4 will be the impact to the West Orange schools? Why did5 the developer move Building D closer to the ridge? Will6 it be necessary to build a water tower for emergency7 firefighting? What is the construction and blasting8 plan? They've not provided any details about what will9 happen during construction and blasting.10 And what, of course what's the environmental11 impact destroying 6,000 trees in the core forest.12 And lastly, can you assure that Howell Drive13 residents that the emergency access road will not be14 open to regular traffic.15 We plan on retiring and downsizing in the16 next five years, by moving this project forward you're17 jeopardizing our ability to sell our home. The light18 and noise pollution alone will impact the quality of19 life on Howell Drive. Who would buy a home that's20 subject to daily blasting at the