February 25, 2026 Planning Board Special Meeting - WEHI Transcript

7 of 68 sheets Page 25 to 28 of 154 03/20/2026 06:14:03 AM 25 Now, we saw through graphic evidence, it was1 last year, there was a fire on Oval and nobody could get2 in or out. And we saw the videos, and it went on for3 several hours and people testified, one woman said, "I4 couldn't even get to my mother who is elderly and ill.5 I couldn't even get out of my complex to get to her."6 And another woman said, "I couldn't get back in the7 hours that was blocked. One to two hours at least."8 And the only means of ingress or egress is that9 structure.10 Now, Mr. Litwornia quotes the applicants11 engineer in his report as acknowledging that if there is12 a blockage or accident at Oval, access to the complex13 will be impeded. We all know that, it's logical. We14 also saw it happening, because when the fire occurred15 and the smoking trees were blocking entrances this past16 year, nobody could get off Oval. Now, there's no17 development here yet, but if there was a development18 here no one could get into it or out of it if Oval's19 blocked. That means the only means of emergency20 entrance are these emergency access drives, possibly21 Kuzak, which would have to get open, and Howell would22 have to get opened.23 Now, would you approve -- you feel it's24 appropriate to approve a 500 unit complex, 496 units,25 26 which will have between 1000 and 2000 people living1 there, assuming they all rent, with this type of tenuous2 emergency access available. This is one of those3 wake-up moments. God forbid a tragedy occurs and people4 die. Five, ten, 20 people die and everyone says, What5 happened? There was no way to the back of the building.6 We couldn't get in to the complex because Oval was7 blocked, and then someone goes back to the Planning8 Board file or the town file and they see this report,9 and they see that the fire chief himself said, "Well,10 rear access would be ideal." We don't have it. The11 fire chief says himself, "access may be delayed because12 we only have one means of ingress and egress." And the13 engineers acknowledge that if Oval is blocked, and the14 evidence shows if Oval is blocked, nobody gets in or15 out. So God forbid some tragedy happens, and they do16 happen, we saw it in California this past year from17 other causes. Ordinary suburban towns went down.18 People are going to go back and look at the file of this19 case and say, there was a

they do16 happen, we saw it in California this past year from17 other causes. Ordinary suburban towns went down.18 People are going to go back and look at the file of this19 case and say, there was a reason to believe this should20 not have been approved. Yet it would have been approved21 and built. So your duty is to say, can I protect the22 public by approving this project, at least as it's23 presented here tonight. The answer has to be, no.24 There's no possible way you can approve it. And it25 27 makes no difference about affordable housing. It makes1 no difference about the settlement agreement and it2 makes not a damn bit of difference about the ordinance.3 You can not legally approve a project if you believe the4 public health and safety is not adequately protected.5 You cannot do so. So I ask you to think about that. I6 know you are. It's probably the most important issue7 here.8 Some people may be wondering, Mr. Plocker's9 letters to council sort of alluded to this and we talked10 about that colloquy, whether the town is in trouble11 legally in the courts if this board denies the project.12 I know some people have been thinking about that. The13 answer is, no. And the answer is no for a very simple14 reason. The town met its obligation. Council approved15 the ordinance pursuant to the settlement agreement, it16 did exactly what the settlement agreement said. It did17 not deviate one iota. Not one dotted I, not one crossed18 T is missing. Council approved that settlement19 agreement, the ordinance went into force, and by the20 requirements of the settlement agreement of the21 ordinance it comes to this body. The township, and you22 are not, the township, legally the township met its23 obligation under that settlement agreement. So if you24 decline to approve this for any of the good reasons we25 28 talked about right now which require a denial, aside1 from what else we talked about, the township is not in2 legal jeopardy, because if the township met its duty to3 approve the plan, to approve the ordinance, then it4 comes here. And it is not your job to worry about5 whether the township gets sued, it could. Towns get6 sued every day of the week. Our brethren and sisters in7 the law makes sure that happens, but that's because8 there are issues at risk. Your job is not to worry9 about that. And in any event, the town met its10 obligation. The town

brethren and sisters in7 the law makes sure that happens, but that's because8 there are issues at risk. Your job is not to worry9 about that. And in any event, the town met its10 obligation. The town cannot be sued for breach of11 contract because you're separate jurisdiction denying12 this plan. And I hope you'll think that through,13 because I know you thought about it. And I know Mr.14 Plocker's letter alluded to it. He wrote two letters15 about it. You should not be threatened with lawsuits,16 the township should not be threatened with lawsuits17 because this body doesn't vote. You can't protect the18 public if you have a litigation gun to your head from an19 applicant.20 Now, I'd like to go to the beginning of our21 PDF. I'm sorry, I get short of breath sometimes. I22 apologize. We'll start with this. I may start and23 stop. This is not meant to be strictly chronological24 necessarily and it's not containing every exhibit in the25