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

03/11/2026 06:15:33 AM Page 109 to 112 of 136 28 of 54 sheets 109 question was about the replacement plan. Tree1 replacement plan.2 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Okay. Tree replacement3 plan.4 MAYOR McCARTNEY: That wasn't really spelled5 out in that Mr. DeFeo report.6 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Okay.7 Mr. Alper.8 MAYOR McCARTNEY: And it's not in the9 ordinance, or a tree fund.10 MR. ALPER: The, the sanitary sewer through11 the stormwater basin, the water tower question, you12 know, there's more time maybe just get a more concrete13 answer on that. A second road possibility. What am I14 forgetting.15 MS. KAPFERER: The sanitary.16 MR. ALPER: Right. Sanitary. Water and17 sewer. I think, I think those are my main things.18 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Oh, Ms. Kapferer.19 MS. KAPFERER: Yeah, sanitary conveyance,20 like the working township engineer.21 MR. ALPER: Oh, right, the sewer capacity22 for the township.23 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: You have to get an answer24 from the township engineer.25 110 MR. ALPER: And to the extent that we had1 conversation about the Canoe Brook, the upper part of2 the wetlands, if there's any, you know, response on3 that.4 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Mr. Cardoza.5 MR. CARDOZA: This might not be entirely be6 on the applicant, because I think, at least the first7 leg, requires research on our part, but tracking down8 the information on the smell affecting the residents?9 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Yeah, I said that.10 MR. CARDOZA: I understand.11 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: I agree. We're going to12 talk to the building department tomorrow.13 MR. ALPER: Not just capacity, but also --14 MR. CARDOZA: Yeah, yeah. But I'm saying15 that because if something, if we are to determine that16 something then responsibility, then a certain amount of17 responsibility rests with the applicant, then we should18 factor that in.19 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: As I recall everything is20 draining downwards to Blakely and it's not going up to21 Howell, but it should be, whatever's going on there22 should be addressed.23 MR. CARDOZA: Yes. Yes. At least a24 clarification, because we heard from the residents that25 111 there seems to be a shifting of --1 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Yes.2 Okay. Council President Scarpa.3 COUNCILWOMAN SCARPA: I would just like to4 see something that they're going absorb the cost of all5 this infrastructure, stormwater.6 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Okay. I believe that7 anything that the applicant is going to have to do as8 far as

like to4 see something that they're going absorb the cost of all5 this infrastructure, stormwater.6 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Okay. I believe that7 anything that the applicant is going to have to do as8 far as stormwater management is for them. They'll have9 to pay for it.10 COUNCILWOMAN SCARPA: As long as it's11 clearly spelled out.12 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Okay.13 Ms. McGovern.14 MS. MCGOVERN: You know, the board can vote15 on preliminary site plan approval and hold off on final,16 which all of these things that are required can be17 presented, and this way the applicant, if it was18 approved preliminarily, it was approved, they would have19 to satisfy all of these things before final site plan20 would be granted. The one thing that's different that21 you just brought up, is this extra exit situation. So22 that's new, and I think that you have to ask the23 applicants attorney about that in terms of timing. They24 may have made inquiry into that, I don't know. We never25 112 asked for it after 20 something, 30 hearings it's not1 been brought up, as far as I recall. But all of these2 other things would all be required before final site3 plan and what you typically do, and this is not a4 typical case by any stretch of the imagination, is that5 on other cases where CME has written a report that said6 items A, B and C have to be done, the board has granted7 preliminary and final site plan knowing that subsequent8 that the engineers will check those things off before a9 building can begin. So that is an option for the board10 and when things are technical and there are things that11 are complicated, the board can withhold that. And then12 when it is reported to the board that they've satisfied13 all of these things then on notice to the community they14 come back for a final site plan, all though no one wants15 another 30 days of hearing, I know that, but it should16 be a lot -- it would be a lot more circumscribed because17 it would be those items have been completed, the board18 would check on them to see that they were done to your19 satisfaction and that would be a simpler vote. But20 that's your choice, whether you want to hold this off21 because you don't feel as though there's enough here for22 you to vote on, that you want to see these things ahead23 of time, or if you want to bifurcate it in a sense that24 you take vote on preliminary, or if you, this extra25