February 25, 2026 Planning Board Special Meeting - WEHI Transcript

37 of 68 sheets Page 145 to 148 of 154 03/20/2026 06:14:03 AM 145 act.1 Any argument that the plans are incomplete2 is without merit. The application was filed more than3 two years ago. There hasn't been a single instance in4 which the Planning Boards professionals have alleged or5 even questioned the completeness of the plans. The6 plans clearly show the stormwater drainage system, which7 has been fully approved by the DEP, the sewer system and8 the waterlines. My client has an agreement with New9 Jersey American Water to service the property and10 approval from the Soil Conservation District, which11 would in any event be required as conditions of12 approval.13 We've actually made the board and the towns14 job a lot easier. We have them all. All of those items15 are customary and normal conditions of approval and we16 satisfied them, like I said. The only item remaining is17 the TWA application in connection with the sewer, which18 is a routine third-party condition of approval.19 This board doesn't grant or agree to sign20 TWA applications.21 My client has met with and will continue to22 meet with township engineers who have a good faith duty23 to cooperate with us so that the township engineer may24 sign off on that application.25 146 There is no doubt that the proposed1 development with the one bulk variance exception fully2 complies with the IH-1 zone and ordinance.3 Accordingly, the board should approve the4 application as is it's duty under the law.5 In the coming week before you deliberate and6 vote, look at the facts. Look at the details set forth7 in the application materials, including the site plan,8 specifically the pages that I referenced. Importantly9 look at your own experts opinions and reports regarding10 stormwater, traffic, sewer, water and geotech. All of11 which support the granting of the application.12 Finally, and Mr. Afran didn't mentioned it,13 but I will, because it was said a lot during these14 proceedings. There's been a reliance by many in the15 public on the boards April 5, 2006 denial of my clients16 subdivision application for the old application of 13617 single family homes. Obviously that was a completely18 different application at the time when the zoning19 ordinance permitted single family residential. So it20 should have no relevancy here. However, I need to clear21 up the record because this board was presented with

ation at the time when the zoning19 ordinance permitted single family residential. So it20 should have no relevancy here. However, I need to clear21 up the record because this board was presented with many22 inaccuracies or incomplete misrepresentations regarding23 the history of the site and the applications that came24 before this board.25 147 First, there were not multiple denials,1 there was one. There were two other subsequent2 applications filed, but they were never heard to3 conclusion.4 Second, this boards denial was overturned by5 the Superior Court. On April 10, 2008 Judge Goldman6 entered an order reversing the denial and remanding the7 application to this board. Again, that application and8 the boards original denial should have no relevancy9 here. So I won't go into details. However, in ordering10 the remand, Judge Goldman noted, "There should be no11 doubt that this development will be built. The possible12 hopes of some neighbors that the property will remain13 virgin forest forever will likely not come to pass. The14 board cannot use its discretion over subdivisions to15 stop construction of a project that conforms to all16 relevant zoning ordinances. The board has a duty to17 work with, cooperate with, and interact with WEHI to see18 to it that the property is developed in accordance with19 the zone plan, zoning ordinance and subdivision20 requirements."21 So, again, thank you for your time. Thank22 you for your dedication. I also look forward to many23 free Wednesday nights in the coming weeks and months,24 but as I will leave you, I will say one last time,25 148 follow the facts. Follow the law. If you do from a1 legal standpoint it's not a difficult decision. The2 board should grant preliminary and final site plan3 approval. Thank you very much.4 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you, Mr. Plocker.5 MR. AFRAN: Can I just note an objection.6 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Wait. Whoa, whoa, whoa.7 Hold it. Hold it. Hold it.8 Tell me what you want to do? Because we're9 not looking for -- any objection now has to be done in10 writing. There's nothing else for the board to11 consider.12 MR. AFRAN: Let me say, in response to --13 well, there's two things. First of all, we've never14 seen this letter from the water company. My -- it was15 done in response to my own experts testimony, we should16 have been given a copy. I'd like to get a copy.17 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Was that,

e never14 seen this letter from the water company. My -- it was15 done in response to my own experts testimony, we should16 have been given a copy. I'd like to get a copy.17 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Was that, was that18 presented to the township from New Jersey American19 Water?20 MR. PLOCKER: The New Jersey Water agreement21 was entered into a week or two ago.22 MR. AFRAN: Yeah, I need a copy.23 MR. PLOCKER: I have no problem doing that.24 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Okay.25