March 4, 2026, Planning Board Regular Meeting - WEHI Transcript

15 of 54 sheets Page 57 to 60 of 136 03/11/2026 06:15:33 AM 57 that can speak to that. Whatever went on in the past1 that addressed it in the township, because I did try to2 make an effort to locate people within the town that3 might have had that information to come here, but was4 unable to.5 MAYOR McCARTNEY: We can still follow up and6 find out.7 MS. McGOVERN: You had -- right. But I just8 want to let you know that that was attempted at least.9 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Well, it's the building10 department, I think that's the place to go, and we will11 have them report back to us within two weeks if -- when12 the issue, if they have a documentation of it and has it13 been resolved. That's fair. Okay. Good.14 Anything else?15 COUNCILWOMAN SCARPA: Yeah. Well, you want16 me to go on, I was going to wait my turn.17 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Absolutely. You got your18 turn.19 COUNCILWOMAN SCARPA: The other, I think20 more important concern of mine, is the safety aspects.21 The primary responsibility of government is to keep our22 citizens safe, right. I have a fiduciary responsibility23 as a council person, elected council person is to24 support the health, the welfare and the safety of the25 58 residents that put me here. I'm deeply concerned about1 the fire safety, emergency ingress and egress. We heard2 testimony from Marea, who was trapped inside her3 development and was unable to get out to deal with an4 emergency crises with her elderly mother and that5 testimony was riveting to me. You know, I urge all my6 colleagues to think about the responsibility we have for7 the decisions we make. You know, sometimes, like I8 said, the metrics that we use can be questionable. You9 know, in -- on April 27, 2025, this is a very real10 concern, the big windstorm took down the tree, it hit a11 power line in the country club, there were live wires,12 our fire department closed Oval Road, right. Blocking13 out our residents from entering and this is real14 experience and in Mr. Pehnke, the developers traffic15 engineer, said that nothing in the plan would really be16 any different. So adding 500 more homes behind that17 fire line, that's a total of 900 residents, to me makes18 no sense when there's only one way in and out more19 people are going to be trapped. I just feel like this20 application presents some really unresolved emergency21 access and public safety risks, including the

hen there's only one way in and out more19 people are going to be trapped. I just feel like this20 application presents some really unresolved emergency21 access and public safety risks, including the ingress22 and the egress. The increased congestion affecting23 first responders response time and stormwater conditions24 that might impede emergency routes and, you know, also25 59 the impact on our neighboring towns.1 MR. KLEIN: Can we do one at a time.2 COUNCILWOMAN SCARPA: Yeah, we'll do one at3 time.4 MR. KLEIN: Yeah, so Mr. Chairman.5 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Mr. Klein.6 MR. KLEIN: Ryan, can you talk a little bit7 about, to me as a traffic engineer unfortunately, Oval8 Road to me is the only way in and out of this whole9 development, whether you say Kuzak's open, close it,10 it's the only way in and out. I asked Mr. Pehnke when11 he testified, don't you need a Boulevard from at least12 Eagle Rock to I guess it's either Bomgart or Warner, so13 that when there is some kind of an incident on Oval it's14 only on one side of the road, it's contained and you can15 still have traffic going on the other side, but16 technically it's not necessary. Now, it might be the17 right thing to do, but they don't have to do it. Can18 you address that a little bit and help enlighten, at19 least me.20 MR. MacNEILL: Yeah. So technically, or not21 technically speaking. If you take a step back, and I22 believe I provided testimony on this. If this23 development goes in all at the same time under current24 regulations it is a cul-de-sac based off Oval Road.25 60 There's no contesting that.1 MR. KLEIN: Right.2 MR. MacNEILL: NJAC 7 -- or, sorry. NJAC3 521, Residential Site Improvement Standards, issues4 clarifications, again, it clarifies their standards. So5 clarification number 3, which is what I indicated in my6 traffic review letter dated October 29, 2025, is one of7 the most important clarifications for this project, so I8 think it is worth reading for all board members to9 understand that. But essentially, I have it right here,10 I'll -- "RSIS does not require that a development build11 before the rules become in place on June 3, 1997 to be12 improved to meet the standards. This is true even when13 a proposed development relies on an existing development14 for its street network, sanitary sewer system, water15 supply system or stormwater management system." So16 essentially what it's

even when13 a proposed development relies on an existing development14 for its street network, sanitary sewer system, water15 supply system or stormwater management system." So16 essentially what it's saying is, if you are in before17 1997 the standards don't apply to you. Whether I agree18 with that or not is a separate conversation, but it is19 my role to just outline the standards and that is what20 the applicant needs to follow. So in this case, whether21 I agree with it or not, they are following the standards22 of RSIS.23 MR. KLEIN: Right.24 And Mr. Chairman, you mentioned before, Oval25